That’s because gankers do not choose random targets. Their ganks are calculated. I have alts that aren’t carebears you know.
Who should the gankers choose to attack in order for it to be a fair fight?
1 Like
If you have a structure in HiSec you should be WarDecable by any player corp, period, regardles of whether or not the attackers have their own. Don’t like it? Don’t anchor structures you can’t defend - or, y’know, actually build relationships with other groups so you have friends to come help you when the crap goes down. Simple and easy. Structures should be limited in HiSec anyway. Athanors and Astrahus only, maybe Raitarus but with limited services.
1 Like
I should post my AG guide I guess.
Fair warning, its a lot of work 
1 Like
The structure penalties (aside from their inherent costs) can be avoided by using holding corporations anyway. Owning a structure becomes a simple cost/benefit analysis (i.e. “do we get more utility out of it than what it costs to replace every X number of days?”).
CCP intended citadels to be a high-sec war/PvP “meaningful content” driver, but if you look at the records of ones that have been destroyed, 98% of them were destroyed without any form of resistance by the defenders.
Yes, that has been my experience. Structure bashes seem to rarely generate a fight. One side, or the other, decides that there is no chance of victory and they simply refuse to fight. Since people keep all their alts in another corporation altogether, there’s no fighting whatsoever.
I did not bring up ganking “fair fights” and did not take a position other than to say that the outcome of ganking is not a random event because gankers do not choose their targets randomly.
But are you saying that the offensive capability of a potential target in any way determines whether or not the target is chosen for a gank attempt?
Then stations should have defenses befitting their size. A station the size of a super titan should have super titan technology and firepower. These capabilities should not be free but the consistency of applied technology in Eve is appalling. Applied technology and firepower correlate with size in this game but with horribly varied and convenient consistency.
Was better the old way where small orgs could war dec anyone. Now you can’t if you don’t have the numbers to defend a stupid structure.
2 Likes
Yes. That does not make your previous statement true.
This conversation veered into the weeds. Best we get out and walk away.
I’m off for a run…toodles o/
1 Like
TOOOOODLEOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooo
1 Like
Hear that Aiko? You’re too scared to gank a ship that actually has guns on it.
That’s right. I’m also the most egregious killboard padder in the history of EvE Online, and I’m superduper megasalty about it.
I totally agree. It should be 100% up to players to ‘police’ areas. The game should allow for stagecoach robbery…and the robbers getting away scot free if there’s no law enforcement around. Likewise, it should allow for sheriffs and their law enforcers…rather than letting useless Concord do the job. This would force more players into PvP as those law enforcers. I would not even mind some sort of automated police that players pay for the upkeep of.
At the moment ‘high security’ is neither high nor security. And there’s a sort of wildebeast type ’ I’m glad its not me the lions are munching on ’ complacency. Not only that, but as Gix said yesterday…nobody in a Hecate is going to bother ganking anything smaller. So everyone in highsec just flies about in their blingy ships and nothing much happens.
1 Like
Congratulations on just describing null sec
1 Like
We’ve been asking for this since the very beginning. But CCP doesn’t care. For dexample, CCP’s idea of “bounty-hunting” involved the bounty hunters paying crime victims for the privilege of going after their attackers. They simp,y don’t ~get~ it.
Unfortunately, the system just described is nothing like null-sec. Null-sec is nothing but a capital-protected grind zone where you get obliterated with disproportionate firepower if you’re not wearing the locals’ colors. It would be like riding into a town to water your horse and being met with a barrage of grapeshot from two dozen 14-pounder cannons, instead of a more rational “freeport” system protected by local authorities in exchange for fees/taxes/profit-sharing like an actual “wild west” environment, with an additional element of vigilante justice thrown in.
The only null-sec area to have ever operated that way was Providence, and if you remember, it was invaded and taken over by sovereign groups in order to bulldoze it and turn it into more PvE grind bot farmland.
1 Like
Ok, this is one of the wierdest most counter-intuitive aspects of EvE.
It makes you wonder if CCP employs actual human beings.
1 Like
No…its not null sec at all. There is no ‘police’ force in null sec…its just factions fighting it out. Remove the security from Amarr and Dodixie and Jita…and you’d pretty soon see an actual player police force arise.
1 Like
It 100 is null sec. Who do you think the player police forces would be? Large, efficient alliances. CCP did not make nullsec the way it is, they simply got rid of concord there. Players made the huge alliances that control areas. Why would hi sec be any different as soon as concord is gone? Pandemic would put 200 man battleships fleets with logi and boosts in to 1 corner, Frat into another corner, Goons into another. And the same intel channels would go up, the same gate camps, the same home defense fleets. And if you came into town wearing the wrong colors, you get shot.
Actually I thought about it some more and probably what would happen is the big alliance would band together, and destroy every single ship that goes to any NPC trade center to force everyone to the TTT.