These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why High Sec Gankers?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Black Pedro
Mine.
#81 - 2015-08-24 07:04:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Avvy wrote:
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:


Yet, I can bop on over to minerbumping, and find hundreds of examples of RL threats, harassment, and other such nonsense directed towards gankers, coming from their targets.

I've yet to figure out how one instance of a ganker crossing the line tars every ganker with the same "cyberbully" brush, yet hundreds of examples of even more vile conduct get brushed away with "Oh they were upset you have to forgive them".

You know, looking at it from an outside, non-Eve perspective, the carebear types really do look like the horrible ones in this equation. I've shown examples of carebear rants and threats to my non-Eve friends, and they've all been disgusted at the behaviour.



RL threats, which basically means you managed to **** off the player behind the keyboard. Of course those threats are almost exclusively just empty threats.

I have to wonder what the ganking is all about with the amount of chest beating that goes on, on these forums.



You nailed it. It's about people whose definition of "winning" EVE is to **** off the player behind the keyboard.
No, the point is to defeat other players in the sandbox in this competitive PvP game. What is the point of consensual "gudfights" where no one loses anything meaningful?

You can play Eve as a space samurai or some 17th-century calvary officer if you'd like where really only honour is at stake in your game, but if you actually want to defeat another player you have to strike them when they are least prepared, or unable to defend themselves so you can diminish their power and take their resources. As Vimsy said, there is no point finding someone who wants to shoot you - you need to find players who are weaker than you, or at least not expecting or prepared for your attack. That is how wars are won - through bold and decisive actions that exploit weakness in the opposition, not through glorious and honourable battles.

If I beat those players and they rage like little children, I have no problem having at laugh at their expense. That isn't the goal however - I would much prefer a "gf" or the equivalent, or an in-game vow of revenge to the bad behaviour so many people display over losing virtual assets.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Avvy
Doomheim
#82 - 2015-08-24 09:26:05 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

...but if you actually want to defeat another player you have to strike them when they are least prepared, or unable to defend themselves so you can diminish their power and take their resources. As Vimsy said, there is no point finding someone who wants to shoot you - you need to find players who are weaker than you, or at least not expecting or prepared for your attack. That is how wars are won - through bold and decisive actions that exploit weakness in the opposition, not through glorious and honourable battles.



Don't know about glorious, there's nothing glorious about war.

There's nothing honourable about hitting a weak opponent, but then I see you seem to agree with that.



'there is no point finding someone who wants to shoot you' if that's the case sounds like mining is a better profession at least you can go semi afk. Nothing more boring than easy kills.
Avvy
Doomheim
#83 - 2015-08-24 09:51:35 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:

I really don't care if the person behind the keyboard is mad or not. I'm engaging in a legitimate form of play, in accordance with CCP rules. Ganking makes me ISK. I build mining ships and modules, and pre-position them for sale in areas before I start ganking.


It's one thing making someone annoyed by just playing the game it's another to deliberately make them annoyed. With what's said on these forms I have to wonder which it really is. It comes across as being a bit of both.

Lady Areola Fappington wrote:

Empty or not, RL threats, homophobic insults and the like are very strictly against CCP rules. I'd even go so far as to speculate that, if getting killed in a video game pushes you to that point, then YOU may be the one with psychological problems, not the ganker.


I'm not quick to get angry, but there are some people that are, it also seems genetics has a part to play in that as well.

Lady Areola Fappington wrote:

As for the threats being empty...yeah. I ended up taking a long Eve break because, among other things, people were cyberstalking me to the point of calling my then employer to "let them know" about my Eve gaming. Not cool. Sadly, I've heard about similar things happening to gankers all 'round the game, and it's kind of sick.


That's why I said almost, as the vast majority of them will be empty as soon as the person cools down. But then a lot will be empty to start with, kind of like physcological warfare. It shouldn't happen but it wouldn't surprise me if the meta gaming on the forums and sites like minerbumping doesn't help.

Lady Areola Fappington wrote:

I'm honestly surprised gankers haven't responded in-kind. People leak personal data constantly, and depending on how talkative someone is about their Eve hobby, it's not hard to go from Eve name to facebook profile to employer/family. Then again, some of us know we're just playing vidya.


Yeah right, all gankers are innocent, that just sounds like ganker propaganda to me.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#84 - 2015-08-24 09:59:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Avvy wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:

...but if you actually want to defeat another player you have to strike them when they are least prepared, or unable to defend themselves so you can diminish their power and take their resources. As Vimsy said, there is no point finding someone who wants to shoot you - you need to find players who are weaker than you, or at least not expecting or prepared for your attack. That is how wars are won - through bold and decisive actions that exploit weakness in the opposition, not through glorious and honourable battles.
Don't know about glorious, there's nothing glorious about war.

There's nothing honourable about hitting a weak opponent, but then I see you seem to agree with that.



'there is no point finding someone who wants to shoot you' if that's the case sounds like mining is a better profession at least you can go semi afk. Nothing more boring than easy kills.


Real-world military forces almost exclusively hit weak targets, or if the target is strong, at their weakest points. Same with criminals.

It's what one does to win.

Stalking, harrying, scouting, surprising, raiding and ganking your target is far from AFK gameplay. The hunt is quite engaging and the payday when you defeat your enemy and take their stuff is far from boring. In fact, finding and forcing a fight on someone who doesn't want it is way more work than finding someone who wants to shoot you.

You should try it sometime before you get bored of meaningless, consensual "gudfights" and quit the game. Actually try to defeat an opponent rather than just holding their hand and taking turns telling each other how honourable you are. Revel in the conflict and struggle against other players rather than spending your gametime trying to hide in order to protect your space honour and imaginary space pixels.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Avvy
Doomheim
#85 - 2015-08-24 10:24:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Avvy
Black Pedro wrote:

Real-world military forces almost exclusively hit weak targets, or if the target is strong, at their weakest points. Same with criminals.

It's what one does to win.


From a military point of view it's about saving lives.

From a criminal point of view it's about not getting caught.

But this is a game and easy kills where you know you will win, I just consider boring.


Black Pedro wrote:

Stalking, harrying, scouting, surprising, raiding and ganking your target is far from AFK gameplay. The hunt is quite engaging and the payday when you defeat your enemy and take their stuff is far from boring. In fact, finding and forcing a fight on someone who doesn't want it is way more work than finding someone who wants to shoot you.


Hunting is the best bit, it's why I'm not keen on locator agents, a network of players would be better than NPCs.


Black Pedro wrote:

You should try it sometime before you get bored of meaningless, consensual "gudfights" and quit the game. Actually try to defeat an opponent rather than just holding their hand and taking turns telling each other how honourable you are. Revel in the conflict and struggle against other players rather than spending your gametime trying to hide to protect your space honour and imaginary space pixels.


High-sec doesn't appeal to me in the slightest for a PvP game it just seems so messed up. So I already know high-sec doesn't interest me, although yet to find out if low-sec or 0.0 interest me, but I'm in no hurry.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#86 - 2015-08-24 11:28:17 UTC
Avvy wrote:

That's why I said almost, as the vast majority of them will be empty as soon as the person cools down.


100% irrelevant, because it's still against the games rules to begin with. You, like so many before you, are claiming that one side should merit an exception to the rules just because that side overwhelmingly gets mad when it loses. Basically that the rules should not apply to them because they are the biggest sore losers in the game.

I say that if the rules were enforced even halfway fairly, that there would be hundreds of banned miners right now. No ganker could ever get away with even an iota of what carebears say on a daily basis and still hold an active account.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Avvy
Doomheim
#87 - 2015-08-24 11:32:28 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Avvy wrote:

That's why I said almost, as the vast majority of them will be empty as soon as the person cools down.


100% irrelevant, because it's still against the games rules to begin with. You, like so many before you, are claiming that one side should merit an exception to the rules just because that side overwhelmingly gets mad when it loses. Basically that the rules should not apply to them because they are the biggest sore losers in the game.

I say that if the rules were enforced even halfway fairly, that there would be hundreds of banned miners right now. No ganker could ever get away with even an iota of what carebears say on a daily basis and still hold an active account.



Annoyed people rarely act or speak rationally.

So is that the meta game, annoy miners to such an extent that they say something that could get them banned?
Black Pedro
Mine.
#88 - 2015-08-24 11:35:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Avvy wrote:

From a military point of view it's about saving lives.

From a criminal point of view it's about not getting caught.

But this is a game and easy kills where you know you will win, I just consider boring.

In both cases it is about winning.

Lining up your equally matched armies on either side of the field in anticipation of an honourable charge at an agreed hour is so 1700's. Real battles involve choosing your moment to strike when you have your greatest advantage.

You can play the game as a space samurai, only dealing in honourable 1v1s at the sun, but don't expect such honour from your opponents. You can look down on them as dishonourable but don't call them real-life "sociopaths", mentally ill, or tear-extractors when they exploit every advantage they have against you to defeat you within the rules of the game.

When you take an opponent's knight in chess, do you then purposely give up one of your own because otherwise you would now be able to get some "easy kills" with your man advantage? I guess unless a chess game is always perfectly even, you would "consider it boring".

Besides, how do you know it is "boring" when it sounds like you have never even tried?

Quote:
High-sec doesn't appeal to me in the slightest for a PvP game it just seems so messed up. So I already know high-sec doesn't interest me, although yet to find out if low-sec or 0.0 interest me, but I'm in no hurry.
It's all the same really. Ganking takes place in all spaces for all sorts of reasons. You are saying you wouldn't let your corp blap a Venture you find ninjaing your gas in your wormhole? Or your defense fleet wouldn't destroy a neutral in a weaponless travel-ceptor that you caught entering your sov? Or you wouldn't stamp out the last remnants of your faction warfare opponents when you have them cornered in that last system with your overwhelming fleet? "Easy kills" right?

New Eden is many things, but fair it is not. You can declare "being the most honourable" as your winning condition, but don't expect the rest of us to accept that or even care. We will continue to struggle for the limited power and resources in the sandbox whether or not you think that is fair or not. If some group wants to control highsec and gank anyone who doesn't pay their extortion, that is just part of the game. Ganking is just a part of that struggle for power that CCP intentionally designed into this sandbox game.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Avvy
Doomheim
#89 - 2015-08-24 12:35:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Avvy
Black Pedro wrote:
Avvy wrote:

From a military point of view it's about saving lives.

From a criminal point of view it's about not getting caught.

But this is a game and easy kills where you know you will win, I just consider boring.

In both cases it is about winning.

Lining up your equally matched armies on either side of the field in anticipation of an honourable charge at an agreed hour is so 1700's. Real battles involve choosing your moment to strike when you have your greatest advantage.

You can play the game as a space samurai, only dealing in honourable 1v1s at the sun, but don't expect such honour from your opponents. You can look down on them as dishonourable but don't call them real-life "sociopaths", mentally ill, or tear-extractors when they exploit every advantage they have against you to defeat you within the rules of the game.

When you take an opponent's knight in chess, do you then purposely give up one of your own because otherwise you would now be able to get some "easy kills" with your man advantage? I guess unless a chess game is always perfectly even, you would "consider it boring".

Besides, how do you know it is "boring" when it sounds like you have never even tried?



Warfare has changed how people view it has changed.

I used to play chess years ago, chess starts evenly except for who goes first. Chess can be fun but it's only really fun if you find someone that's an opponent that is good enough to make it interesting. Easy wins don't really make it fun.

I've never suicided a miner, don't intent to as I have no reason to. I just see the reason people have to suicide others as a broken mechanic.

Black Pedro wrote:
Avvy wrote:


High-sec doesn't appeal to me in the slightest for a PvP game it just seems so messed up. So I already know high-sec doesn't interest me, although yet to find out if low-sec or 0.0 interest me, but I'm in no hurry.
It's all the same really. Ganking takes place in all spaces for all sorts of reasons. You are saying you wouldn't let your corp blap a Venture you find ninjaing your gas in your wormhole? Or your defense fleet wouldn't destroy a neutral in a weaponless travel-ceptor that you caught entering your sov? Or you wouldn't stamp out the last remnants of your faction warfare opponents when you have them cornered in that last system with your overwhelming fleet? "Easy kills" right?

New Eden is many things, but fair it is not. You can declare "being the most honourable" as your winning condition, but don't expect the rest of us to accept that or even care. We will continue to struggle for the limited power and resources in the sandbox whether or not you think that is fair or not. If some group wants to control highsec and gank anyone who doesn't pay their extortion, that is just part of the game. Ganking is just a part of that struggle for power that CCP intentionally designed into this sandbox game.


It's the mechanics of high-sec that I don't like, plus things like mining and missions don't really interest me.

If I'm in a corp. that's at war, then it's a war and as such you have to maintain your sense of honour but you must also realise that you are not just responsible for yourself. In most battles the easiest way is to get rid of the easiest ships first and this will reduce the amount of weaponry trained at you. Like in other MMOs kill the healers first, no point damaging a target if someone else is healing it, unless you have enough fire power to take it out quickly regardless. Like I said earlier war is about winning with the least amount of losses possible. But it's just a game, so it doesn't matter if you blow them all up as honour in a game is nothing more than RP.

New Eden is not fair, but then neither is the real world.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#90 - 2015-08-24 13:22:43 UTC
Avvy wrote:
I've never suicided a miner, don't intent to as I have no reason to. I just see the reason people have to suicide others as a broken mechanic.
Enforcing a claim on space, either an ice belt as was traditionally done, or now all of highsec like the New Order has is a "broken mechanic"? What about loot drops from blinged-out miners? And so is interdicting isotopes Hulkageddon-style? And what about producing mining ships for sale and stimulating the demand for them by ganking?

There are many of good sandbox reasons for wanting to spend resources and time to gank miners. There is nothing "broken" about that. You are not entitled to gather resources in this game without risk and that risk is intended to come from other players. The sense of entitlement you seem to be perpetuating - that miners should be "just left alone" - is at the root of these anti-ganker whines like this thread and even motivates more gankers to stop these miners. The ice and asteroid belts have value and thus some players want to claim them - they are driving conflict as intended.

If you were in charge of CCP how would you fix highsec miner ganking which you think is "broken"? How would you engineer reasons (that are acceptable to you) for players to attack miners so that miners are at some risk while gathering resources?

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#91 - 2015-08-24 14:39:49 UTC
Avvy wrote:

Annoyed people rarely act or speak rationally.

So is that the meta game, annoy miners to such an extent that they say something that could get them banned?


It does not matter what prompted them to break the EULA by verbally harassing another player. It does not matter what emotional state they were in, the rules were still broken.

Somehow, all the people I associate with do not lose their minds when they get blown up, probably because they're actually not childish and petty. People who do lose their minds prompted only by a ship loss do not, in my opinion, deserve to play this game at all.

So if you're asking whether I follow the rules myself, and expect others to do the same? Absolutely.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#92 - 2015-08-24 14:40:46 UTC
Avvy wrote:

Warfare has changed how people view it has changed.


War never changes.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Bellatrix Invicta
Doomheim
#93 - 2015-08-24 15:10:45 UTC
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

If you think you've won, think again.

The CODE always wins.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#94 - 2015-08-24 15:15:38 UTC
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

A multitude of Thunderdome competitors disagree with you....

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#95 - 2015-08-24 15:20:21 UTC
That's more sportsmanship than anything.
Bellatrix Invicta
Doomheim
#96 - 2015-08-24 15:26:47 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

A multitude of Thunderdome competitors disagree with you....


An honorable fight isn't the same thing as having honor. I would actually classify those fights as more valorous, than honorable.

But then again, I'm a pedant.

If you think you've won, think again.

The CODE always wins.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#97 - 2015-08-24 15:28:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Bronson Hughes
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
That's more sportsmanship than anything.

Honor is honor, be it in sport or otherwise. Somewhat ironically, the ones I've seen be most inclined to exhibit it have been the ones most likely to be labeled as "bad guys".

Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

A multitude of Thunderdome competitors disagree with you....


An honorable fight isn't the same thing as having honor. I would actually classify those fights as more valorous, than honorable.

But then again, I'm a pedant.

Fair enough. We are, perhaps, talking at cross points here.

Carry on.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Bellatrix Invicta
Doomheim
#98 - 2015-08-24 15:32:05 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
That's more sportsmanship than anything.

Honor is honor, be it in sport or otherwise. Somewhat ironically, the ones I've seen be most inclined to exhibit it have been the ones most likely to be labeled as "bad guys".

Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

A multitude of Thunderdome competitors disagree with you....


An honorable fight isn't the same thing as having honor. I would actually classify those fights as more valorous, than honorable.

But then again, I'm a pedant.

Fair enough. We are, perhaps, talking at cross points here.

Carry on.


THAT was honor and why I would vote for you for CSM without reservation.

If you think you've won, think again.

The CODE always wins.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#99 - 2015-08-24 15:41:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Bronson Hughes
This may cost me your vote, but I'd like to point out:
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

Bronson Hughes wrote:
A multitude of Thunderdome competitors disagree with you....

Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
THAT was honor and why I would vote for you for CSM without reservation.

I win.

Pirate

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Bellatrix Invicta
Doomheim
#100 - 2015-08-24 15:43:53 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
This may cost me your vote, but I'd like to point out:
Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
I'd just like everyone to realize that "honor" doesn't exist in New Eden. It's an idea perpetuated by folks who lose ships in order to lessen the sting of non-consentual PvP.

Bronson Hughes wrote:
A multitude of Thunderdome competitors disagree with you....

Bellatrix Invicta wrote:
THAT was honor and why I would vote for you for CSM without reservation.

I win.

Pirate


Your action on the forum was honor, no action in-game.

Just sayin'.

If you think you've won, think again.

The CODE always wins.