These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

High Sec Ganking - CONCORD Balance request

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ajem Hinken
WarFear Gaming
#901 - 2017-03-01 03:05:28 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Trying to prove the nature of ganking with one statistic that deals with CONCORD kills is not exactly ethical statistics.
Why not? The number of people that Concord kill has a direct relationship with how much suicide ganking is going on. They kill all of the active aggressors involved in a suicide gank, and those kills are recorded.

The suicide ganking figures are probably lower than the graph suggests, a percentage of the people that Concord kill are people making silly mistakes.

Quote:
We all know that when alphas were introduced, the player base increased largely and alphas were getting wiped out in herds.
Citation needed for alphas getting wiped out in herds.

Quote:
Player numbers have also been steadily decreasing over the years.
That is irrelevant to the graph, it doesn't display that data, and Baltec1 isn't making any sort of claim about player numbers, he is saying that suicide ganking has been trending down for a while and that the 6 month rolling average of Concord kills has hit an historic low suggests that his claim is true.

If you want to add PCU numbers to it, the data is freely available via Eve-offline.net. Go for it.

Quote:
That statistic does not say anything about ganking and how it's trending.
It records a statistic over a time period, and that statistic has a relationship with suicide ganking. The fact that the 6 month rolling average is considerably lower than it was 4 years ago is a trend, a downwards one that demonstrates Concord are killing less people than they did 4 years ago, which suggests that there are less suicide ganks happening now than there were then.

One thing that is obvious on the graph is Burn X events, massive spikes of Concord kills and a sizeable bump in the 6 month average.

I've afk'd in space in Jita in a Heron (no good tank) during a 'burn Jita' event. I got shot at.

Wimpy Heron won with half shield. MVP Caldi gate guard.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6875494#post6875494 - Ship mounted explosives. Because explosions and Jita chaos.
Erich Einstein
Swoop Salvage
#902 - 2017-03-01 08:13:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Erich Einstein
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:


What does that graph represent, in terms of data recorded?
What do you think that the data plotted shows?
Is there a relationship between how many people Concord kill, how many people are actively participating in suicide ganking, and how much of it they are doing?
If not, why not?


The graph is meaningless in understanding how ganking has been trending in EVE. There are a number of factors that go into making those numbers what they are. The simple fact that you dont understand that a decrease in players on the sever since 2013 would very-likely also cause a decrease in CONCORD kill numbers shows that you dont know how to analyze data properly. If server numbers and CONCORD kills decrease at the same rate over the years, it is actually very likely that ganking numbers are remaining constant or roughly the same.

I have listened to other people's stances and updated the OP to take into consideration those who have made fair points. If you would like to contribute something meaningful that improves the OP then by all mean I am happy to discuss those things with you.

What i'm not going to do is junk my thread by running off on a tangent that has no intention of constructively improving the OP. CCP's forum rules are clear in stating that threads should remain as clean and polished as possible.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#903 - 2017-03-01 09:00:43 UTC
Erich Einstein wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:


What does that graph represent, in terms of data recorded?
What do you think that the data plotted shows?
Is there a relationship between how many people Concord kill, how many people are actively participating in suicide ganking, and how much of it they are doing?
If not, why not?


The graph is meaningless in understanding how ganking has been trending in EVE. There are a number of factors that go into making those numbers what they are. The simple fact that you dont understand that a decrease in players on the sever since 2013 would very-likely also cause a decrease in CONCORD kill numbers shows that you dont know how to analyze data properly. If server numbers and CONCORD kills decrease at the same rate over the years, it is actually very likely that ganking numbers are remaining constant or roughly the same.

I have listened to other people's stances and updated the OP to take into consideration those who have made fair points. If you would like to contribute something meaningful that improves the OP then by all mean I am happy to discuss those things with you.

What i'm not going to do is junk my thread by running off on a tangent that has no intention of constructively improving the OP. CCP's forum rules are clear in stating that threads should remain as clean and polished as possible.


You still have not answered why this nerf is required. It cant be because ganking is out of control because clearly it is not, it is less than half of what it was 4 years ago while the populaltion has exploded.
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#904 - 2017-03-01 09:10:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
NightmareX wrote:

Then work to fix the sec status then so you don't lose that ability. It's not rocket scientist stuffs we are talking about here.


You have yet to tell us why this nerf is needed.


WTF really? and where have you been from the last xxx of pages?
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#905 - 2017-03-01 09:15:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Naye Nathaniel
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
Erich Einstein wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
It isn't just podding though. you take a sec status hit just for shooting a guy in lowsec.

Go fight over a lowsec moon and you could very easily find yourself unable to enter highsec, possibly even trapped in one of those silly little lowsec pockets (Kubinen in The Citadel, or Sarline in solitude, for example. Both in three system lowsec pockets only accessible through highsec)

And nowhere have you said WHY this is good. Nor have you explained why there should be a pve requirement to get your sec status up high enough to actually be able to move around after you go pvp in a manner that you, personally, disapprove of.


Like I said... I sure CCP would address these issues and the hits lowsec pilots take to their security status if implementing a version of this OP. The issue is not with lowsec pirates, but out of control ganking teams in Jita who get to avoid any effort in repairing their criminal actions. Given that, lowsec pirates are still criminal so Im sure that something like this would still affect you to a certain extent. If you want to be a criminal... you just need to own it and be a badass.

Hard to be a "badass" when your idea causes me to die like a (female dog) the moment I jump into highsec.


If your sec status is "bad" then yeah. you should die when trying (getting to high sec) - and don't mess with dogs u piece of crap!
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#906 - 2017-03-01 09:20:21 UTC
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
So if you make it harder, I can do less ganks, and since apparently ganking is an infinite faucet of ISK for gankers, I make less money. If CCP halved the amount of minerals in highsec ore, that would mean miners make less. That's a nerf. If freighters suddenly had their cargoholds halved, they'd make less money moving things since they can't fit as much. That's also a nerf. So why, pray tell, is allowing me less ganks not a nerf but a "balance?"

Making things harder isn't forcing you to do any less ganking. It just make you work a little harder for each crime you do. And do work for your action is something that everyone has to face.

Yeah, the gankers can just fit up a ship, undock and do the gank, and rince and repeat forever without any work at all as all of his gank ships are already fitted in the station.

So balancing this out is a good idea.

Remember, no risk = no reward. Alot of risk = slot of reward. That's EVE.

If I have to repair my sec status after every gank/every X ganks, that takes time away from ganking, and I only have so much time to play. Ergo, I am forced to gank less. It's also balanced. The gankers ARE the risk, and they wouldn't get nearly as much reward if people didn't autopilot 10bil freighters through known gank systems.


Really?
So you just admited that you are fine that you can do a lot of ganks "because you are short for a gameplay time" and don't give a **** about players which u ganged and have to work out their 10 b cargo and ship by itself ? BECAUSE if the thing would be ballanced then you will loose your fun?

WTF is wrong with you people?!
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#907 - 2017-03-01 09:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
Really?
So you just admited that you are fine that you can do a lot of ganks "because you are short for a gameplay time" and don't give a **** about players which u ganged and have to work out their 10 b cargo and ship by itself ? BECAUSE if the thing would be ballanced then you will loose your fun?

WTF is wrong with you people?!

You know people can already nearly eliminate their gameplay by not carrying 10B in cargo and simply using a Webber.

No changes are needed except the behaviour of people.
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#908 - 2017-03-01 09:27:00 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
Really?
So you just admited that you are fine that you can do a lot of ganks "because you are short for a gameplay time" and don't give a **** about players which u ganged and have to work out their 10 b cargo and ship by itself ? BECAUSE if the thing would be ballanced then you will loose your fun?

WTF is wrong with you people?!

You know people can already nearly eliminate their gameplay by not carrying 10B in cargo and simply using a Webber.

No changes are needed except the behaviour of people.


And why you force them to change their behaviour? Because you wan't? You can? or what?
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#909 - 2017-03-01 09:31:15 UTC
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
Really?
So you just admited that you are fine that you can do a lot of ganks "because you are short for a gameplay time" and don't give a **** about players which u ganged and have to work out their 10 b cargo and ship by itself ? BECAUSE if the thing would be ballanced then you will loose your fun?

WTF is wrong with you people?!

You know people can already nearly eliminate their gameplay by not carrying 10B in cargo and simply using a Webber.

No changes are needed except the behaviour of people.


And why you force them to change their behaviour? Because you wan't? You can? or what?


The irony of complaining how one group shouldn't have to change their behaviour while asking for other to do exactly that.... Roll

Wormholer for life.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#910 - 2017-03-01 09:31:45 UTC
Naye Nathaniel wrote:


WTF really? and where have you been from the last xxx of pages?


Trying to get an answer to my question.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#911 - 2017-03-01 09:32:19 UTC
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
Really?
So you just admited that you are fine that you can do a lot of ganks "because you are short for a gameplay time" and don't give a **** about players which u ganged and have to work out their 10 b cargo and ship by itself ? BECAUSE if the thing would be ballanced then you will loose your fun?

WTF is wrong with you people?!

You know people can already nearly eliminate their gameplay by not carrying 10B in cargo and simply using a Webber.

No changes are needed except the behaviour of people.


And why you force them to change their behaviour? Because you wan't? You can? or what?

No one is forced to do anything.

It's their choice; and choices have consequences.

If they want to take the extra risk and get ganked, like you ganked that badger in the past, then more fool them.

Totally voluntary to expose themselves to that much risk.
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#912 - 2017-03-01 09:47:24 UTC
OK we already know that yours (as ganger) only argument against ideas in this thread are:

"Cause we like it like it is"

and

"Pilots (which can't run away from a gang) are just an idiots if they fly with 10b of cargo"
Well even a webber won' safe them but fck it! who cares about them? We still want to have a fun;

Fck that "risk vs rewards" system;
We still want a REWARD with no risk! (i still blame that freighter pilots as it theirs fualt.

(ironic off);
Damn... wood....wood is everywhere..
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#913 - 2017-03-01 09:50:15 UTC
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
OK we already know that yours (as ganger) only argument against ideas in this thread are:

"Cause we like it like it is"

and

"Pilots (which can't run away from a gang) are just an idiots if they fly with 10b of cargo"
Well even a webber won' safe them but fck it! who cares about them? We still want to have a fun;

Fck that "risk vs rewards" system;
We still want a REWARD with no risk! (i still blame that freighter pilots as it theirs fualt.

(ironic off);
Damn... wood....wood is everywhere..


More a case of not wanting yet more content removed from the game for no reason.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#914 - 2017-03-01 10:18:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
OK we already know that yours (as ganger) only argument against ideas in this thread are:

"Cause we like it like it is"

and

"Pilots (which can't run away from a gang) are just an idiots if they fly with 10b of cargo"
Well even a webber won' safe them but fck it! who cares about them? We still want to have a fun;

Fck that "risk vs rewards" system;
We still want a REWARD with no risk! (i still blame that freighter pilots as it theirs fualt.

(ironic off);
Damn... wood....wood is everywhere..

Mate, you're the ganker here, not me.

I've never ganked anyone in the game, ever. I play in null and low for my pvp, but that's just my preference, not any better than anyone else's choice of where and how they want to pvp. They are all totally fine choices.

I do however web my own industry/freighter alt through highsec and it provides near perfect safety.

The mechanics are fine. It just takes a bit of personal responsibility.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#915 - 2017-03-01 10:24:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Erich Einstein wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:


What does that graph represent, in terms of data recorded?
What do you think that the data plotted shows?
Is there a relationship between how many people Concord kill, how many people are actively participating in suicide ganking, and how much of it they are doing?
If not, why not?


The graph is meaningless in understanding how ganking has been trending in EVE. There are a number of factors that go into making those numbers what they are. The simple fact that you dont understand that a decrease in players on the sever since 2013 would very-likely also cause a decrease in CONCORD kill numbers shows that you dont know how to analyze data properly. If server numbers and CONCORD kills decrease at the same rate over the years, it is actually very likely that ganking numbers are remaining constant or roughly the same.

I have listened to other people's stances and updated the OP to take into consideration those who have made fair points. If you would like to contribute something meaningful that improves the OP then by all mean I am happy to discuss those things with you.

What i'm not going to do is junk my thread by running off on a tangent that has no intention of constructively improving the OP. CCP's forum rules are clear in stating that threads should remain as clean and polished as possible.
We know player numbers have been low, nobody is saying otherwise.

Drop the PCU numbers over the graph, show a correlation between the number of players online and the number of people being killed by Concord, support your claim rather than just evading the question.

At the moment, you've got nothing.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#916 - 2017-03-01 12:32:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
OK we already know that yours (as ganger) only argument against ideas in this thread are:

"Cause we like it like it is"

and

"Pilots (which can't run away from a gang) are just an idiots if they fly with 10b of cargo"
Well even a webber won' safe them but fck it! who cares about them? We still want to have a fun;

Fck that "risk vs rewards" system;
We still want a REWARD with no risk! (i still blame that freighter pilots as it theirs fualt.

(ironic off);
Damn... wood....wood is everywhere..


More a case of not wanting yet more content removed from the game for no reason.


No reason? We gave u already a LOT of reasons;
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#917 - 2017-03-01 12:33:49 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
OK we already know that yours (as ganger) only argument against ideas in this thread are:

"Cause we like it like it is"

and

"Pilots (which can't run away from a gang) are just an idiots if they fly with 10b of cargo"
Well even a webber won' safe them but fck it! who cares about them? We still want to have a fun;

Fck that "risk vs rewards" system;
We still want a REWARD with no risk! (i still blame that freighter pilots as it theirs fualt.

(ironic off);
Damn... wood....wood is everywhere..

Mate, you're the ganker here, not me.

I've never ganked anyone in the game, ever. I play in null and low for my pvp, but that's just my preference, not any better than anyone else's choice of where and how they want to pvp. They are all totally fine choices.

I do however web my own industry/freighter alt through highsec and it provides near perfect safety.

The mechanics are fine. It just takes a bit of personal responsibility.


Hell no - I'm not a ganger;
And im glad you are fine with your freighter - im too lazy to check if you have any connections with gang teams or not flying the gang pipe systems ;)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#918 - 2017-03-01 13:35:33 UTC
Naye Nathaniel wrote:


No reason? We gave u already a LOT of reasons;


Which are?
Naye Nathaniel
COBRA INC
Seventh Sanctum.
#919 - 2017-03-01 13:44:51 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:


No reason? We gave u already a LOT of reasons;


Which are?


It won't be easy for you so go figure it out by yourself - page by page :)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#920 - 2017-03-01 14:27:22 UTC
Naye Nathaniel wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Naye Nathaniel wrote:


No reason? We gave u already a LOT of reasons;


Which are?


It won't be easy for you so go figure it out by yourself - page by page :)


So you don't have one.