Was ganking ever buffed?

Communications Center General Discussion
1

They closed that thread before I coult react. I am not reopening the thread, I am making new one about different issue.

Continuing the discussion from The Real Victim of Ganking? The Ganker:

Well, not really. Yes some nerfs and buffs to ships or weapon systems affected ganking. And yes, I listed these in my previous summary. But that wasn’t really aimed against ganking. The result to ganking was indirect and non-intentional.

And while there are clearly intentional nerfs to ganking. I recall none intentional buff to ganking. Prove me wrong please.

Holy moly, are you serious? What absolute nonsense is this. I can’t fathom how can you be logical and reasonable about other mechanics on this forum and so dense when it comes to this.

What else is a removal of former advantage than a nerf? It doesn!t matter how advantageous something was or even if it was exploit. If it was specifically used by gankers and CPP specifically removed that mechanic because of gankers it is direct nerf to ganking.

Also there were two more direct nerfs to ganking that nobody mentioned in that thread:

  • bumping limit (previously used to hold loot piňata freighter in place until enough force can be formed)
  • inability to board ship as criminal (previously used to gank freighters with less attackers than it would normally need)

These two mechanics were unhealthy and they needed to be removed, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t nerf. And while you can argue that it is still technicallly possible to keep freighter in place indefinitely (switching 7 toons who would warp scram the freighter every 2 minutes, nobody ever did that afaik and this is prime example of what I was trying to tell - CCP doesn’t need to remove ganking, all they need to do is to make it so annoying that we won’t do that anymore. And they are going in right steps.

Yes I suppose you can say that citadels were buff to ganking. However as I wrote, it was never intented to buff ganking. And unlike the two mechanic above, this actually had a counterplay and it had a potential to create lot of content. Instead carebears cried as much that CCP overnerfed this and removed even mechanic that was possible from the start - ability to dock in stations.

And while inability to dock in stations is totally logical and I support that change, imability to dock in citadels is nonsese. I don’t care about tether, that mechanic is stupid completely, but not be allowed to dock in our own citadels is absolutely illogical and killed player content. And while you can argue that highsec carebears will likely never form a resistance against their oppressors it doesn’t mean it had to be removed like this.

3 Likes
2

I don’t care for intentions, I care for effects. A buff is a buff, intended or not. And a fix is a fix, be it a nerf for something or a buff to something else. Unlimited bumping clearly was a gameplay issue that they didn’t want to see in their game, so they removed it. Not with the “intention to nerf ganking” but with the intention to improve the gameplay experience for their customers.

Tbh I don’t really believe CCP ever does decsions with “balancing ganking” in one way or the other in mind. Because honestly, I be believe ganking is pretty insignificant and completely unimportant. All those myths that it keeps the economy running and EVE would break with out it are - in my opinion - totally nonsense. If CCP would a 100% remove ganking right now, in a year nobody would even talk about it any more or wish it to be back. The economy wouldn’t even feel a dent.

I dare to disagree. EVE is an economic and society simulator. And in every society I would call an “advanced civilization” the argument private property!!! doesn’t trump the governments ability to hunt down and kick any non-law-abiding citizens ass. That means, for me it is completely logical, that a hunted outlaw (which -10er gankers were) cannot just hide inside a walmart becuase he has a platinum walmart membership (aka standing) or even his own house while the police is on the run going after him. They would simply kick in the door and get him.
I mean, for me personally it would be okay if the Faction Police would simply wreck each structure in HS that allows outlaws to dock and hide from them, but I guess that wouldn’t be to the gankers liking eiter?
Sry, we don’t come together here. HS is government regulated space and outlaws shouldn’t be able to dock there, anywhere. Period.

And tbh, the security tags should be removed as well. It makes absolutely no sense to apply for amnesty every second day. I agree to have that as an option for someone who really wants to change his ways, to maybe usable once a year to really begin anew and that might require to use HS to be part of a new corporation. But those who regulary gank should be truly outlawed from HS, hunted on sight and should they want to keep targeting players in HS, they should need to put some effort behind it, by using wormholes or lowsec gates to stage behind and then do a surprise warp to their target to kill it. But not that “idling in front of a station for hours” where they have already blown up dozens of ships, but then waving their amnesty card “hehe I paid money for it!!!”. Sry, that is what would call illogical, immersionbreaking and a huge buff to ganking (intentional or not).

3 Likes
3

The removal of ganking would be the end of EVE. They can nerf it, they can make it more difficult, but they can’t remove it.

4

Not the slightest. 95% of the EVE population wouldn’t even notice it.

3 Likes
5

You know better, or at least you should. The inability to lose your ship to another player would turn high sec into a 24/7 bot fest. Not to mention that players who manufacture ships would see their sales decrease significantly. Who is going to keep buying freighters and marauders when they can never lose one?

5 Likes
6

Ganking was buffed when CCP implemented Surgical Strike. It was buffed when ABC were introduced (you can still gank with as few as 8 chars). Structures were also a buff (doesn’t matter if it was not intentional) because gankers could just sit on gate grid all day, approach a bookmark (makes them bump immune) and wait for targets.

7

I do, thats why I come to my conclusion. Ganking is completely irrelevant to the game. If you wanted to bot 24/7 in HS you can do right now. Gankers won’t care for you, you won’t lose a ship in a year to them if you run a missionbot somewhere in the Bleak Lands. Let it use a bricktanked Nighthawk or DrakeNavy and no ganker will ever touch it. I mean, Iceminers probably do it right now all over New Eden and they simply don’t lose their Mackinaws and Orcas at an amount that would even remotely stop them.

Also the stuff destroyed in ganking look much for someone who doesn’t PvP, but its absolute peanuts compared to the industry producing things or PvE generating money each day. The only thing that would change is that transportation would get cheaper, since everyone and his dog would send his DSTs and Freighters per Autopilot instead of avoiding some timezones or using a scout/webbing alt.

You guys really treat ganking like a holy cow, but it’s not more than a scarecrow. Aside from a maybe a few dozen real people still involved in that business, the overwhelming majority simply doesn’t care for ganking, because it simply doesn’t affect them. They never gank and they never get ganked, ever. The myths and fearmongering spread on these forums here have MUCH more impact than the ganking ingame itself. :slight_smile:

3 Likes
8

Even if they would put it in patch notes as “we fixed unintented mechanic that allowed gankers to avoid 15minutes criminal timer” it doesn!t mean it is not a nerf or a buff. It can be both.

9

It doesn’t have to be bots. What you people fail to consider is the economic impact the removal of ganking would have. With no danger from other players, high sec belt, ice, and moon miners would be sucking down trillions of m3 of resources unimpeded. Then placing those resources on the market, driving the price of those resources down to the point they are all but worthless.

4 Likes
10

And it was already proven in EVE Echoes. Why do they keep thinking that economy wouldn’t crash in “real” EVE is beyond me.

4 Likes
11

I don’t disagree, but as said: Ganking got buffs and nerfs over the years, mostly (in my opinion) comletely unintended. Doesn’t really matter. But its plain wrong to complain that “ganking has only been nerfed!” because that is simply not true. I mean, it’s probably easier than ever, just calc in the cost of the security tags and you can now sit as non-outlaw on the gate/station you want to camp for all eternity waiting for a good target. No FacPol to worry about, you are even somewhat protected from attacks yourself by CONCORD (or better: it would be very costly for someone to remove you preemptively).

If that isn’t convenient, what is?

1 Like
12

EVE Echoes is a completely different game. Events there prove absolutely nothing in regard to the normal EVE Online that exists for decades and has magnitudes higher streams of value floating all around and through HighSec. As said, simple numbers show that Ganking doesn’t destroy any significant amount of assets. I mean, look at zkillboard. It claims to be 450b destroyed in the last 7days by ganks, don’t know how accurate that is. But: Compared to what the large alliances (and even midsize indu corps) generate or what all those thousands of PvEers generate each day, its just dust.

13

This was always the case. Station camping profit ganking is a a form of ganking that was not affected by any of the nerfs or buffs. It uses long guns, those doing it always had to raise their security status up after few ganks and their targets didn’t get any EHP buff. The only thing that changed was Jita station layout and 6 undocking corridors which made ganking slightly harder, but that is just Jita and no other system changed like this.

So “easier than ever” is gross overstatement.

If you are referrng to Clone Soldier tags, those existed since I joined EVE so for me, nothing changed. But it is definitely possible that they weren’t there from the beginning and they were added later, possibly even as a direct buff to ganking (which I doubt, but okay). Does anyone have a source for this?

14

They were implemented a few years ago to make it easier to get back security status. Before that you had to rat (aka kill NPCs) in different systems quite often to slowly get a very tiny security-status increas every 20 minutes (only counting the NPC with highest bounty). But again, that wasn’t to intentional “buff ganking” (as said: I believe CCP simply doesn’t care for ganking), but to make life more convenient to the players. Because most people hated this tiresome ratting stuff to get their secstatus back.

1 Like
15

It’s a very similar game to EVE online. But with some key differences, one of which is no HS ganking. Others are making it easier to do hands off play with all weapon systems, not just drones. Items that are billions in EVE Online are Trillions in EVE Echoes due to the massive money supply.

4 Likes
16

Its removal would be the end of the EvE that I want to play. High Sec ganking is one of the last bits of fun in high sec. It adds the friction that makes it so everyone does not just auto pilot while eating lunch. It is the thing that keeps people from afk mining 24/7. It adds the tiniest bit of excitement to lvl 4 missions in safe space.

The game would be poorer without it.

5 Likes
17

2013 is few years ago? Okay…

18

Tags aren’t even needed. Their removal would change nothing. Just gank on alts. When their sec status hits -10, delete it, roll another one, train it just enough to do decent DPS in a Catalyst, rinse repeat…

1 Like
19

This was the way prior to tags

1 Like
20

Yep. With unlimited free accounts, anonymous email, and a whopping $3.75 USD 3-day weekend Omega, I could gank to my heart’s content every weekend all month long for less than the cost of an Omega sub.