There is no SERIOUS consequences to hi-sec ganking - this needs to be addressed and fixed

Council Of Stellar Management Assembly Hall
21

So, we can basically ignore everyone that has posted above this. Why? Because they are the old time players who think a game never has to change and shouldn’t change. It’s the same old arguments that have already been heard:

Undocking is inviting pvp,
you can avoid gankers if you know what your doing
don’t use the best equipment for the task because you’re inviting to have it destroyed
go find something else to do,
quit and go play a different game
there really are consequences such as kill rightsetc, etc, etc.

The point being that as I already stated, there are no serious consequences to hi-sec ganking. None. A kill right is nothing. Woopty do. You can try to hunt them down and destroy their next 2.5 to 7 million isk ship. Big deal when they cost you 30 million or in some cases over a billion. Security status loss as I already stated is ZERO deterrent as it effects nothing on play style.

Until the system is changed to make people think about actual consequences to ganking in hi-sec it will not deter it even slightly. The opportunity for people to grief and ruin others game play time is there and there is a large section of people that just love to act it out because they simply enjoy being pricks to others. You want pvp in hi-sec? Fine, then make it no consequences at all if that is what was intended for it to be. If not, put in some real deterrents.

This is the elitest attitudes from established, old time players that is the problem. They make huge assumptions on things, such as my being in SiCO which I am not currently albeit I was for a short time. They assume that I’m stupid based on how so many of the posts went. Even had one player essentially say I’m a liar that I couldn’t be playing such a short time and be in an Orca.

None of this in the end will make any difference in the game because ultimately the established player base is going to have the biggest voice on things. Regardless of what you want to believe or not, it will drive players away from the game. CCP has already admitted that the player base has been shrinking for years. Your player counts are often times from players having mulitple, multiple accounts. I saw one guy today with 10 accounts out mining. I know of many other players that run 4 to 8 accounts themselves. So raw player count doesn’t mean squat.

Enjoy folks. As I figured everyone just turned the post into a base the new guy and make it sound like it’s nothing but a whiny complaint. Instead of being able to have a constructive discussion on things. Although I will say 1 or 2 actually tried somewhat at that.

3 Likes
22

There’s plenty of constructive discussion here. It’s just not what you want to hear. Which is fine. You don’t have to participate.

Eve isn’t the game you want. You could adapt to the game it is and have an awesome time. You don’t want to. You want the game to adapt to you.

You can’t even back up your claim about whatever you think is driving away new players. Eve doesn’t need new players who want to play a farming simulator. Eve needs new players who can adapt to Eve.

That apparently isn’t you. That’s fine, but the loss is inconsequential. Eve is fine.

5 Likes
23

Why do you think that? I mean, maybe CCP will, probably correctly, prioritize the wishes of their loyal and long-time customers over new players or non-customers, but really they are masters of their own destiny. They only have to answer to their owners, and will build the game they want to build. It just happens, they set out over 20 years ago now to build a competetive virtual universe sandbox game, and one of the core ideas of that is “nowhere is safe” and “death matters”.

It does seem unlikely your thread is going to change the direction of a game that launched over seventeen years ago and has attained success and longevity beyond all but a handful of other games of the era. However, I’m not sure why you seem to think that CCP could somehow change the core of the game without risking the players that came for the very gameplay - and the economic simulator it enables - that you are complaining about.

Of course ganking drives players away. But so does boring mining. Or NPC attacks. Or the lack of walking on a planet. Everything drives players away, and everything also attracts and keeps players, and player counts are only a relevant arguement if you look at all sides of the balance sheet.

The core premise of Eve - that nowhere is safe - enables the true gem of this game, probably unrivaled anywhere in gaming: the player-driven economy. It is this element of the game that attracts and keeps more players than probably any other in my estimation, and turning highsec into safesec not only wouldn’t be much fun for most players, even to players like you who think it would be, it would hurt the viablility of economy that CCP is working very hard at rescuing right now. That isn’t to say highsec safety and crime is perfectly balanced or couldn’t be changed, but it really is suppose to be a place where loss can happen and other players can influence your game experience, not a safe Farmville in space.

Everything CCP has said is that player activity and numbers is way up recently. It also grew even faster back in the day when the highsec was even more harsh and dangerous.

Using player numbers to justify why your pet idea or personal desires for a game experience should be catered to by the developers is asinine. You have to be completely unaware or self-centered to an extreme to think everyone else on the planet is looking for the exact same gaming experience as you. Some people like harshness. Some people like challenge and the unexpected. Some don’t and that’s fine, but to claim that you speak for all gamers is either disingenuous or delusional.

Carebears have literally been doing that since the game launched. They promised unless CCP made the bad pirates go away, the game wouldn’t last a year. They literally made this thread every month for the last 17 years reiterating the same promise. Guess what? The game is still here and growing again while almost every other “safespace” MMO that has launched in the early 2000 is dead.

And the joke of it is that every time CCP has tried what the safebears asked for and made highsec safe, activity has remained the same or even dropped. There is no evidence in the activity numbers we have seen that a safer Eve draws more players. That correlation isn’t proof of anything, but it certainly casts serious doubt that there are a flood of Eve players just waiting for the game to be made a little safer before they overrun the servers and shower CCP with riches.

Look, there is a flavour of Eve coming that might scratch your itch - Eve: Echos. The mobile version of Eve is going to have a completely safe highsec! Maybe that will be the game for you. I have a feeling though you won’t last a month before you bore of mining in a game where perfect safety is going to mean your efforts are going to have such little meaning. But who am I to say? Different strokes for different folks.

4 Likes
24
  1. There are consequences for high-sec ganking. The players involved lose their ships, and they lose security status. Yes, the ships are (relatively) cheap and players can repair their security status, but that requires time and money. In the end, there’s no bigger consequence in EVE than to have your stuff blown up.

It does cost them isk, just like it costs you isk to keep fitting out ships and sending them out. But this is the nature of EVE. Highsec does not mean safe, it means that CONCORD polices the space and will blow up somebody who attacks you. It doesn’t mean they will prevent it, it means they will respond to it.

In the end, the fundamental concept that every player must adapt to when they start playing EVE Online is that once you undock, you are no longer safe, and something bad can happen to you. Once a player accepts that, then they won’t get bent out of shape when somebody does, indeed, blow up their stuff.

  1. You can easily war dec groups like CODE and the like - they have structures in space, so if you want to retaliate against them, there are mechanics that allow you to do so. Those players are harder to gank largely because they do not put themselves in gankable ships often.

  2. Ganking does not drive new players out of the game. CCP’s internal data has shown that players who lose a ship to another player are MORE LIKELY to stay with EVE than those that do not. Here’s the thing - you don’t have to play 10-12 hours a day to earn enough in-game currency to get premium game play. There are plenty of ways to get the isk for an omega that don’t involve that kind of time commitment. Getting out of highsec, for one thing, would be a good start. The rewards (as well as risk) go up when you go do other things. There’s also the ability to pay for your subscriptions, which negates the need to do any in-game PvE if that’s not your thing - that’s what I do, because I hate mining and most PvE, although I do some of it for the experience.

The game is fun for everyone - but you have to accept that some days you are going to be somebody else’s content. You can’t expect to be able to do what you want to do every second of every day and not have someone else try to disrupt it. That’s fundamental to EVE, and has been for seventeen years.

In terms of your “fixes,”

  1. Highsec is safer than lowsec and nullsec. A five man roaming gang couldn’t kill your Orca in highsec before CONCORD takes them out. And even if you were in a large nullsec group with a supercapital umbrella, that Orca is a ripe black ops target that even the quickest response couldn’t save. There is nowhere safer for you to be than in HighSec doing what you’ve been doing. A better fix is not to use expensive stuff that makes you a target for CODE and other gankers. I doubt they’d have gone after your drones if they were Tech 1 or Tech 2, and even if they had, replacing them would have been easier.

  2. This is already going to happen - the cost for T1 hulls is necessarily going to go up thanks to the nerfing of mining in nullsec. Whether it goes up high enough to stop folks from ganking is unlikely, but in the end, as long as they end up isk positive on the way out, they’ll keep doing what they’re doing.

  3. Making it so that someone will criminal status immediately explodes ignores that there are tons of legitimate ways to get a lower criminal status, like fighting in lowsec, that would penalize people for doing things that don’t involve ganking. That’s one of the reasons (at least one that doesn’t involve behind the scenes mechanics) that criminals are even allowed to transit high sec.

I know you don’t want to hear from all the “elitist” old time players who disagree with you, but you need to realize that what you are asking for is to fundamentally change what EVE is about because you went through the same thing every other generation of EVE player went through. Instead of demanding that the game change to fit what you want to do, it makes more sense and is likely easier for you to simply adjust your expectations so that they’re more in line with what the game is.

5 Likes
25

Have you considered that if everybody responds the same way to your proposal, that perhaps you are the one who is wrong, and not them?

7 Likes
26

image
image776×950 210 KB

3 Likes
27

You obviously didn’t read my post in detail because it addresses basically every point you’ve made in this post. For some reason you are refusing to concede that your ignorance may be the cause of your frustration rather than the mechanics being the problem.

Stop treating us like we’re elitists set in our ways. Our main message to you is that you can learn from us and once you do you will feel differently. CCP needs to improve player education, not ganking mechanics.

2 Likes
28

No, what he said is this:

He was referring to the common practice of ganking augmented drones with smart bombs. Those kills don’t produce killmails, and hence you cannot see them on zKill.

Actually, no. He isn’t and it doesn’t.

SICO isn’t that bad, and the powers that be there know much better than this. They just happen to let everybody do whatever they want, and being that many, that means you get to see a lot of variety and in particular some stupidity there.

Anyway, turns out I know this guy. I’ve also ganked him (during the campaign against ICANP). He’s obnoxious enough that even in SICO many didn’t like him and about a month ago some started to push to have him kicked. He would do things such as bring RL ■■■■■■■■ into fleet chat and block the FCs (!) so he could ignore them telling him to stop doing that kind of crap. He ended up leaving SICO himself when he became aware others were pushing to have him kicked.

Not only he won’t listen, but he will pretend others shouldn’t listen either. And it’s not just everyone that disagrees with him in this thread. When he was in SICO he would also tell his fleet mates to ignore their FCs because, according to him, they were also too elitist or whatever. Go figure…

4 Likes
29

Knowledge you are a real piece of crap with no real knowledge of what has gone on. You are a whiny player who got pissed off because I chewed your ass out for ganking a new player at only 2 weeks of play time costing me virtually all of the isk I had at the time and thus have taken out a personal vendetta to do whatever you can to screw with me in game. So take your bull crap somewhere else as this will be one of the few times that I will directly respond to someone.

Now as to this statement:

Anyway, turns out I know this guy. I’ve also ganked him (during the campaign against ICANP). He’s obnoxious enough that even in SICO many didn’t like him and about a month ago some started to push to have him kicked. He would do things such as bring RL ■■■■■■■■ into fleet chat and block the FCs (!) so he could ignore them telling him to stop doing that kind of crap. He ended up leaving SICO himself when he became aware others were pushing to have him kicked.

As I said, you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. I never blocked fleet commanders except 1 who was a complete ass all the time. No, they did not sit there and tell me not to talk about this or that. No I did not bring up real life stuff into chat unless others were doing it first. No i did not leave SiCO because of any knowledge people were pushing to have me leave. They DID however make several false reports about things I said which my chat logs proved wrong.

You may think I was a lon3 voice but I wasn’t. There were plenty of players that agreed with what I said and messaged me privately simply because they didn’t want to get bashed like I was for voicing my opinion on how things were and should be changed, yes to benefit newer players but also the numerous players that want some safety until they are ready to engage in other activities. Even in the new corp I’m in there are players that agree with me that what you do and other gankers do should be banned in hi-sec or much more severely penalized.

So take your high and mighty comments and shove them where the sun don’t shine because all you were doing here is an attack post because you’re butt hurt over being chewed out 2 months ago for being a complete arsewipe to a new player.

30

Gankers gonna gank. Game ain’t gonna be changed for you.

Rail impotently in the forums as much as you want. You’ve been given so many opportunities to learn in this thread; you’re not interested.

These are your choices. You’re responsible for your losses.

You’ll come to terms with that or you’ll leave.

No it doesn’t matter how many people agree with you.

CCP did an actual study on whether ganking drove players away from eve. It doesn’t.

Here’s a Dev talking about it:

https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5504176#post5504221

Sucks to be you. Adapt or die.

Oh and here’s the Fanfest ‘15 slides presented by CCP about how nobody cares about ganking:

slide1 slide2 slide3

5 Likes
31

We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed. The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc. Isolating players away from the actual sandbox seems very contrary to what we would like to accomplish. - CCP Rise

@Brun_Warbear that is one of the best citations I’ve come across. I’ve restated it here just so I can save this post (otherwise I won’t know what the hell I’m saving :wink: )

2 Likes
32

I added a little extra.

1 Like
33

going to need some :ice_cube: for that :fire: :scream:

1 Like
34

And to preempt the obvious comeback my killboard is visible. You’ll see I’m a carebear. :bear:

1 Like
35
2 Likes
36

That’s right Knowledge, i left the MINING fleet, not SiCO in general for that reason and that was 2 weeks before I was out of SiCO at all. Also the ONLY way you’d have that message is if you have a spy alt account in there so congrats on being a part of SiCO whom you supposedly despise so much. I got very fed up with many of the people in that mining fleet who’s opinion on anything, not just the game, mattered. Couldn’t have a conversation unless you agreed wtih them on everything and since I was really receiving very little if any benefit from them I left to go out on my own. I had already quit mining the moons vs the belts as I had calculated out the profits form selling the ores on both and moons with the exception of 2 ores which rarely spawned just didn’t pay as well. They are great for the players who want to afk for 2 hours though if they have an orca or for awhile on those running procurers/retreivers.

37

@Flint_Ensteele there are several of us who are attempting to engage you on points of merit instead of SiCo squabbles. Perhaps we can go back to what the post was about? A lot of us raised a lot of points and counterpoints which you have not specifically addressed

38

You’re a liar. That was 2020-04-15. That was the day you left SICO and that was the reason you left.

Wrong. I could easily have an alt there, but I don’t. I have that log because someone in SICO sent it to me.

This is wrong too. I have nothing against SICO since they expelled ICANP from the alliance.

Nobody cares. You may pretend whatever you want, but you’re the obnoxious one here that many other people get fed up with, and you’ve proven in this very thread what a liar you are already…

1 Like
39

Although I am much in favor of ganking, I do find it ironic that having a low sec status from ganking makes your character useless for almost everything in highsec… except more ganking.

1 Like
40

It would be ironic if the loss of sec status made ganking easier, but it doesn’t. It makes ganking harder too, to the point that many gankers spend significant amounts of ISK to prevent their sec status from dropping too much because otherwise ganking wouldn’t be practical for them.