Aside from CONCORD (and PvP) and cost, right?
1 Like
ok this is going to go off the path but hey lets go….and lets include the whole comment not just a snippet so . what was said “as it stands right now, there is no consequences to the ganker/criminal in terms of when it comes to the effort of what people have achieved to the effort needed in taking it away form them.” so your being concorded / cost is not consequential to the effort / cost of those your lessons are being taught to.
1 Like
Aside from CONCORD (and PvP) and cost, right?
Here’s my idea:
- Change nothing in ganking mechanics.
- Change nothing with CONCORD mechanics.
- Change nothing in punishments.
But… Make the fight itself more interesting and proactive from defensive side.
A list of actions that can change the outcome of a gank:
- movement
- warp
- tank
- shooting back
- performing e-war
Introduce active defense modules. Since we have many different environments (lowsec, null, abyss, mission areas, complexes…) and a lot of balancing considerations, there is a simple way to make defensive modules work only as defensive modules and not be abused in other situations and regular PvP - they can only be activated against ships with a criminal flag and only in highsec (just like bubbles, cynos and many other modules can only be activated in null). And they definitively should not be able of being used in regular PvP or PvE.
Movement and warp are already handled by MWD, MJD, warp disruptors,…. so they may not be suitable to be covered with defensive modules. Also, the potential for abuse is big.
That brings us to the following types:
- Defensive guns - shoots ships with a criminal flag
- Defensive ECM burst - breaks target locks of ships with a criminal flag
- Emergency damage controls - something like an Assault Damage Control, but can only be activated if a ship with a criminal flag is shooting you. Note that this one might have a potential for abuse (by alts), so it may either be scrapped as an idea or brainstormed further to minimize the abuse potential. (My opinion: too much abuse potential, but I’ve listed it here just as an example)
- Add more ideas for modules
Features and implementation details (each “may or may not“ means that it can be decided during design or tweaked in balancing passes):
- Active modules. May or may not have auto-repeat.
- May or may not be possible to fit only one defensive module.
- May or may not have spool up time (like armor repairers).
- May or may not require targeting (targeted or AoE).
- May or may not be implemented alongside Criminal Auto-Target module that has different performance than ships regular targeting system. Ganking is mostly being done in ships that are significantly smaller than their targets (ex: Freighters). Some balance would not hurt the fun.
- Can be implemented either as
- classic ship modules - this option has design challenges, because slot layouts would probably need to be changed for some ships (Freighters, most notably). However, it does present an interesting idea that you need to sacrifice a slot to put a defensive module in it.
- separate defensive slots - in my opinion, the least painful way to implement this as a new feature with a clean slate. It can be tweaked and balanced separately from other already existing ship features without affecting the existing features. So, the main benefit here is feature isolation so it can be balanced more easily in the future.
- Regular modules may or may not be able to be activated when a defensive module is running.
At least in my opinion, this ticks many boxes:
- Active - no AFK defense. You don’t activate it, it doesn’t work.
- Autopiloting still makes you a loot piñata, just like now.
- Regular PvP and PvE balance stays unchanged, since two conditions must be met at the same time in order to use a defensive module:
- the only environments where it works is highsec. Criminals in lowsec are not affected.
- they only work against ships with criminal flags and/or when ships with criminal flags are shooting you
- defensive side has a chance to fight back, but only if they are active and aware of their surrounding
- It would feel more like real PvP.
- No new mechanics (like CONCORD bribes) or hidden features required. All players already know how to fit and activate modules.
- Industrial boost (new blueprints, requires materials to build the modules,…)
This is just an idea. You may or may not like it. In fact, I may or may not like it if I invest more time in brainstorming it. It just seemed to me as an interesting concept, based on both ganker’s point of view and the complaints from victims. Do with this idea as you wish. As far as I’m concerned, I’m now done with ganking threads. 
Ok, how about not going AFK - that’s a good start.
Also, try fitting the ship…
1 Like
so this is actually fundamentally wrong.
- Mining skills are mostly very short trains and yield profits from day one, as some bit of mining skills come pre-trained.
- A Gankster does maths and stuff to figure out if you’re worth ganking, but even if that doesnt happen, they’re figuring out exactly how much it would take you kill your ship, and spend the least in doing so. It, at a foundation level, is more complex than mining.
- The Gankster loses their ship, which does indeed have a value. A Gankster trained the proper skills to achieve the goals they are working towards, the same as a miner does.
- A Gankster loses sec status, and has to spend effort or isk to repair it. A Miner does not have to put forth any of that effort. Ore is literally everywhere. ok, not literally, and not everywhere. It’s in a lot of places, and there are a Lot of solar systems that are empty. Yet they have the ore you’re looking for. This means that a miner has to spend considerably Less effort than a gankster. Yet, the miner is still choosing to not have Any situational awarenes. A Miner is choosing to bling their ships. (total waste of isk). A Miner is choosing to Not do anything at all to protect themselves. That is Not the fault of the Gankster.
- A miner can go to any solar system in the game to get ore. A Gankster has to find you. You have infinately more possibilities to escape a Gankster than a Gankster has to kill you.
1 Like
fair enough, there is more to it than i am aware. i thought it was scan ship, janice fitting/hold to find worth, gank if my fleet is worth less than scanned ship. i still think my original suggestion has merit.
1 Like
I WANT A VERY CLEAR CERTIFIED EXAMPLE OF TANKEFFORT VS GANK EFFORT…
BECAUSE I BELIEVE YOU HAVE NO FREAKING CLUE WHAT THAT IS…
I BELEIVE YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FROM TEH FORUMS FOR TROLLING
SO I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVE
Ahaha, yep, just pilot manually in a travel fit, will solve part of the problem. D-scan will solve the other part (when luxury golden Golem is ratting cheap NPC). Using scout for a very risky trips with solid loot will solve yet another one (or use services)… so no ganks will affect the pilot if that pilot passed exams in a pilot academy (not just pleased a teacher for a licence).
well hello again, i see you still haven’t figured out how to read as this question was answered from the original poster, caps locks this time ? shhh we are trying to have a constructive discussion, banned for trolling ? lol please child, nothing i have posted has been anywhere close to trolling. you seem to just get so explosive over a simple suggestion to people ansking a question on a subject that seems to be a little tense. drink more water and try yoga, might help
BTW highsec in EVE is very secure. In UK for example robbery level is very high, and no one cares. You can cycle a bike in London and end up walking without any punishment for a ganker. When police informed that your goods are on ebay and that person is selling, they are not doing anything. If someone will be arrested, likely will be released very soon as those are not crimes from the government POV. But in EVE gankers are punished… which is far away from real life… as likely CONCORD should ignore those crimes as not life threatening (only punish for PODs from time to time).
You can ‘suggest’ all you like, but for a suggestion to be meaningful and not just a load of hot air it needs to be from someone who has experience of all sides of the equation.
This forum is full of people ‘suggesting’ things when there is zero evidence they have ever undocked, let alone engaged in the activities to which their suggestion pertains. It is full of armchair generals who’ve never actually been to the front line yet are somehow all expert enough to suggest changes to scenarios they’ve never been involved in.
Have you ever ran a professional ganking crew to make such a statement, or are you just guessing?
what is the point of this topic if CCP does not read it? better go to reddit, there you can influence CCPs actions.
Yes there is a punishment. Why do you insist that there isn’t? I don’t understand why you keep ignoring everything that has been said in this thread.
From what I read, piracy used to be a huge part of the game. People talk about pirates in low-sec like they were legends who hunted ships, ransomed people, and made space feel dangerous.
From my point of view, high-sec ganking today seems like the same spirit, just in a different place. It keeps players alert and makes hauling or mining feel like it actually matters how you fit and fly your ship.
Maybe the mechanics changed over the years, but it looks like the same idea: some players create the danger, and that’s part of what makes EVE interesting.
PS: I like pirates.
3 Likes
The mechanics havent changed one bit. Its the same.
Its all the same.
P.S. I like pirates to….i love when they spend their isk.
negative, i dont have to punch someone in the face to know that its wrong and saying its wrong would still be meaningful enough, same goes with ganking. even if im not engaging in the act doesnt mean that a suggestion of what I think would bring better change is wrong and not meaningful. the forums are full of people with ideas and suggestions that they believe would make the game better and thats ok just like its ok for you to think it wouldnt, but its also full of people afraid of change to a niche part of the game, but thats what the forums are for, discussions amongst peers on everything about the game for everyone.
nope have not, but all in all getting 4 or 5 catalysts together to go pop a hulk doesnt seem like a lot work. and then being able to repeate that act unhindered by consequence and moving with impunity was not a guess in my suggestion pertaining to the original posters question.