Player Features and Ideas Discussion

First, its 15 minets , then you can gank again.
Secondly , you can gank at -10.

Do you have anything to support that people usualy fly about in all they have, and that they just unsub after getting that ganked?
Because if not then its just fiction.

You just made that stuff up im guessing after losing something yourself.

wut?! wake up > http://imgur.com/QM1pVwU that's real farm in null space
yeah several hours *facepalm

I never been ganked, use Frogs service.

Ganking is not the problem.

The problem is the fact that the targets have the choice of 'Don't be there' or 'Die in 10 seconds without any real interaction'.
These are bad choices for game play.

The solution is to give all Industrial ships real fittings including turret slots, and EHP comparable to combat ships. (DPS will obviously not be the same since they won't have any bonuses towards turrets, and Cargo extenders should get a stacking penalty to make it not silly to not fit 100% extenders as soon as you fit any).
Then give a longer ganking timer (Yes, Longer! More time to gank).
This introduces more variables into the equation, and more time for players to get involved on both sides, and means that pure DPS gankalysts may not be the best choices in some ganking locations. All of which are good things.

Personally, I'd also remove concord spawning and just have them activate a remote self destruct that can't be cancelled, as this then stops lag happening from Concord spawning in larger numbers, which also opens up a range of different ganking tactics such as smart bombs again.

TLDR version.
Ganking does not need to be more expensive, it needs to allow interaction.

That's a variant on 'don't be there'. And mostly irrelevant too, since it has no bearing on the interactions that happen with ganking, since even if everyone did those things, people would still get ganked because gankers want to see stuff blow up.
Pretending otherwise is victim blaming and totally not on.

Wrong, it has every bearing on the interactions that happen with ganking. If you don't make yourself a target those interactions rarely, if ever, happen to you; they happen to other people.

It'll never happen, there will always be people that let greed, laziness and stupidity control their choices and the gankers will always be there to provide consequences for doing so.

Victim blaming is blaming somebody for, involuntarily, participating in something nasty; they don't give their consent and as such I agree, victim blaming is generally not on.

Eve is a game, well known for its chaotic and lawless nature, and every subscriber plays it voluntarily; by logging in you consent to every interaction with other players that is permitted by the game mechanics, this is known as implied consent.

If people choose to not protect their stuff in a PvP game such as Eve, it's entirely on them.

So no, it's not victim blaming at all, it's not even close.

Axe concord, let people sign up to be high sec police instead :)

*Flees*

Well this comes down to Risk and Effort v Reward. The reason that there is not a huge number of white knights out there is that there is very little reward.

The Gankers stand to gain the cargo/Mods on the target ( or bling KMs). White Knights get a few dozen small blasters.
With the proliferation of Alts its nearly impossible for White Knights to be everywhere at once, Gankers just have to know where a target is/going.

Not saying I care either way, I don't gank and very rarely go to HS.

Personally I think Gankers are a important part of Eve, without them certain parts of Eve would just stop. The Freighter Market be almost non existent as would most Exhumers. The hauling profession would make even less as everyone and their dog could haul with Max Cargo Indies, not to mention that it would be even more boring than before.

There also might also be issues with the market as all of those lost modules/ships would have never been replaced (less isk sunk into buyers fees, more modules on he market ect).

Indeed. Eve is just a game - a PvP game to be precise - so there can really be no victims. Sure, we role play and have the trappings of 'space police' and 'space criminals', but this is just a game based on numbers and with rules that allow attacking other players. No one can be "victim blamed" for being a target in this game, nor should they try to shame the attacker by claiming they did something wrong by engaging in intended game play.

It's like some senile chess grandmaster doggedly starting with the same, sub-optimal opening despite it long having an effective counter. Is it "victim blaming" to tell the grandmaster it is his fault that he keeps losing matches because of his predictable and sub-optimal play? Is it "bullying" for his opponents to keep using the effective counter so that the grandmaster can't "play how he wants" and use his favourite opening? No, it is not. That is just how the game works.

But Daichi has reminded me to take a pause, and enjoy reading one of the great classics in the genre, http://gankingisbullying.blogspot.com/ . I suggest we all take a break from whatever it is we are doing, and reflect on how removed from reality some world-views can be, and how great a game Eve is that it can create so much meaning and emotion in some players over the simple act of shooting a virtual spaceship.

Oh, like most games there are winners and losers. And because Eve is a sandbox where players can set their own goals two sides can both claim to win. But there still is no 'victim'. There are just players who have lost a particular PvP contest.

You can feel sore over a loss or elated over a victory - that is perfectly normal and one of the great things about this game. It is one of the things the constant vulnerability and permanent loss possible in this game is meant to elicit. You can even feel "victimized" over a loss as who am I to tell you how to feel. But this idea of victim blaming or victim shaming isn't a thing, nor is this tendency to accuse an attacker of misbehavior (or a mental disorder) useful. It is not "blaming" the victim to tell them they could have played different to avoid a negative outcome - it is either giving some advice, or perhaps in some case, gloating over a win or some combination of the two. Everyone knows the Golden Rule of Eve that when they undock, explosion of their virtual assets is one possibility and ultimately it is your responsibility if you lose a ship.

But ultimately there are no 'victims' in this game. Everyone has all the tools to prevent and mitigate losses to other players, and losses to other players are the central game play of Eve. Ship loss drives PvP and building those ships gives meaning to PvE. Most players don't like losing ships, but throwing up your hands and declaring yourself a 'victim' or accusing anyone who says it was a mistake or choice you made that resulted in that ship loss a 'victim blamer' is not healthy nor a successful way to play the game.

CCP has purposely put you out there with a bulls-eye on your back. If you are going to play this game, it is up to you to make sure you stay out of harm's way.

There are no real victims like there are no real crimes. But like pedro said, there are winners and losers like in any game/competition. It may upset you to lose, but calling yourselves victims is laughable.