These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ganking too easy?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2013-09-11 22:07:57 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
This is how sociopaths commonly view things. "It's their fault people worked hard for something. I just steal stuff because I can."


At which Ivy League university did you receive your psychology degree?

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#62 - 2013-09-11 22:12:37 UTC
IIshira wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:

My question to you is: What is the point of security status? What is the point of Kill RIghts?

Right above this is a post describing the impunity with which the ganker operates and the economic calculus. The only reason the entire game is not played this way is that the vast majority to not find it fun to play as gankers.


Security status for one shows other pilots that you might be a possible danger. A little secret of Eve is all pilots in system show up in in this chat thing named "Local". If you see a whole bunch of -10 pilots there might be cause for alarm.

Also low security status allows pilots in that system to freely engage them. Myself and many others do just that with sensor boosted ships at stations and gates. Nothing like podding a -10 with over a billion ISK in implants.


Kill rights does just what it says. It allows the owner of the kill right to engage(Kill) the target ship and pod. You can even set it to your corp, alliance, or even make it available to the public. You can even request to be paid for the kill.


What security status and kill rights don't do is make their ships align slower, offline modules or guns, scram or web at gates or anything that would make them a defenseless target. They didn't get that opportunity to make you defenseless when they ganked you so why should you get that advantage. I understand they're committing a "Criminal act" but all lowsec PVP falls under this as well.


I do way more mining and mission running than PVP but it's the PVP that makes Eve what it is. You might not consider being ganked PVP but it is.

I don't get ganked when I mine and I don't pay for some silly permit (One FAILED attempt). I don't get ganked when I run missions. I don't get ganked when I haul items from one station to another. There's a reason for this.... Just follow some very basic principles and you are fairly safe. If you choose not to do so and get ganked remember you made that choice. Eve is a PVP game and you made yourself a target for a PVP attack.

You have to stop blaming others for your failure and figure out what you can do to succeed. I've been playing Eve for four years now and I once was bitter against PVP. Being on the losing end will do that to you. I didn't stay bitter for long because I figured out what I needed to do in order to succeed. If all else fails remember Eve is just a game... Yes I know CCP likes to say "Eve is real" LOL


This is incredibly muddled and contradictory that I simply don't know where to begin.

I don't recall blaming anyone for "failure". I do recall suggesting that the mechanic does not offer any kind of remote payback and in fact encourages ganking.

No tears, no blame, no nothing. But the simple fact of the matter is that Kill Rights and Security Status do nothing to deter as has been posted by pros in this thread.

Eve is a PVP game, really? Thanks for clearing that up.

Really in Eve there are 3 "Battle Grounds".

1. In null the pvp is wide open.

2. In low, the gate guns are your friends if you know how to use them. This is used routinely to break up camps.

3. In Hi Sec, there is Concord and the gate guns, which only makes certain the ganking ships are destroyed, but Concord is slow other than around stations or gates so meh. The Kill Right mechanic which would seem to be a measure of compensation for the victims is completely worthless.

This is the question in this thread: Is ganking too easy due to the complete ineffectiveness of the Kill Right mechanism? So far, the evidence and opinions is overwhelmingly that *yes it is*.
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#63 - 2013-09-11 22:13:51 UTC
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
This is how sociopaths commonly view things. "It's their fault people worked hard for something. I just steal stuff because I can."


At which Ivy League university did you receive your psychology degree?



Actually it is my Medical Degree that was granted to me by the University of California. Do you have any more questions?
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#64 - 2013-09-11 22:23:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Aldus Dumbledore
Spine Ripper wrote:
With the risk of diluting my previous post I will address the OPs idea directly. I still think the "eye for an eye" approach is wrongheaded as you can never make me suffer a loss like a miner does. But here goes....

For gankers like me, as has been pointed out, you do not need a kill right. You, in fact, have infinite kill rights on me. So, a change as you are suggesting to give you some larger than one but still finite number is actually redundant.

Now as to why this would be a VERY bad change for the carebears. My scout is a very well known member of the New Order. Even without my activities he is regarded with great loathing by the mining community and adulation and admiration by the players of Eve who, well, understand what Eve is. This scout can often times be found sitting in the ice or asteroids in a moderately expensive (but well tanked) Stabber Fleet Issue. This in not the "Invincible Stabber Fleet Issue" flown by James 315 but the "Somewhat Invincible Stabber Fleet Issue" that a scout who isn't bumping would fly.

This SFI has been the subject of numerous gank attempts by miners who have been bumped to the point of, for them, action. Embarrassingly, two have been successful. In each of these gank attempts, both successful and futile, my scout has received one kill right. These kill rights have often been exercised upon the miners when, not understanding game mechanics, they went back to mining. So, now, what if the gank generated multiple kill rights. Ah, to be a miner upon whom an Agent of the New Order had 10 kill rights. He might as well quit. He certainly isn't mining for a month.

James 315 has made a point of the fact that each change CCP has made to help protect the carebears can be used by the New Order to make life miserable for the miners. For example, the way he dissolves his corp upon being wardecced and immediately reforms it is something the industrial corps demanded because they were being wardecced. Now they find to their frustration that they cannot wardec James 315.

They asked for that. Now, if they get this too, the New Order will make them regret it every day.

You cannot get revenge upon a dedicated ganker by destroying his ship(s). You "win" by not getting successfully ganked. I told you how to do it. If you cannot be asked to follow good advice, then... well, I'll be seein' ya.




I know it is all cool and "leet" ganker to think your victims are just bots but something tells me they would figure it out.

You *can* get revenge on a dedicated ganker if you were able to kill a certain "isk dollar amount" of his assets that was more balanced. We all know the loss of one catalyst/tornado etc is not enough to deter and in fact, the low cost of these ships ensures profitable activity.
Soylent Jade
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2013-09-11 22:30:47 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:

You are acting with impunity. This is a gank alt. It goes from the station to the gank with no consequences. All you have to do is have one main with a good standing and it never has to leave the station other than to gank. With undocking invulnerability and smart use of bookmarks you cannot be stopped.

As you posted above, there are no consequences for this toon and nothing can be done to stop it's activities.

This thread is about why this is so and proposals to do something about it because it is too profitable for you and your victims have zero recourse that makes economic sense other than to reward you and finance your game play with game mechanics as they stand.

I get it. The status quo serves you very well. I simply think a little too well and the Kill Rights concept needs a CCP hand on the scale.


So how is getting more kill rights you don't need or can't effectively use going to change anything?

Making hisec better...one Catalyst at a time

minerbumping.com
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2013-09-11 22:39:12 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
This is how sociopaths commonly view things. "It's their fault people worked hard for something. I just steal stuff because I can."


At which Ivy League university did you receive your psychology degree?



Actually it is my Medical Degree that was granted to me by the University of California. Do you have any more questions?


Lies. University of California doesn't provide a Doctor of Bad Posting degree.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Spine Ripper
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#67 - 2013-09-11 22:46:42 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:


I know it is all cool and "leet" ganker to think your victims are just bots but something tells me they would figure it out.

You *can* get revenge on a dedicated ganker if you were able to kill a certain "isk dollar amount" of his assets that was more balanced. We all know the loss of one catalyst/tornado etc is not enough to deter and in fact, the low cost of these ships ensures profitable activity.


You still don't understand gankers. This isn't an ISK war. By making it one you give us a weapon that we can ALWAYS beat you with. CCP has already made it unprofitable except in the case of freighters.

We kill you for our own reasons. The New Order has its reasons. The other gankers have theirs. I even have my own. Making ISK isn't one of them. I enjoy the setup, the warp in, the kill and the escape. Doing it RIGHT isn't easy or all that common. I've had people on the forum argue that I can't solo Rets in .7 systems. I've killed hundreds.

If you want right now, you can sit outside of Kino VII-13 and try to shoot me when I come out, try to kill my pod when I come back or even try to figure out where I'm ganking and sit there and shoot me when I arrive. Its possible to do and there are people who are good at it. Most people fail miserably because I am accounting for it.

But you can never deter me in an ISK war. Even putting aside the New Order stuff, I kill miners because I like to.

You are barking up the wrong asteroid.

All Highsec miners must follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct or be subject to bumping or ganking.  No permit, no mining. www.minerbumping.com
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#68 - 2013-09-11 22:49:46 UTC
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
This is how sociopaths commonly view things. "It's their fault people worked hard for something. I just steal stuff because I can."


At which Ivy League university did you receive your psychology degree?



Actually it is my Medical Degree that was granted to me by the University of California. Do you have any more questions?


Lies. University of California doesn't provide a Doctor of Bad Posting degree.


Ah, a harvest of tears. Nurse, he looks a little sad. I'll sign a 5150 for his own protection.
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#69 - 2013-09-11 22:57:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Aldus Dumbledore
Spine Ripper wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:


I know it is all cool and "leet" ganker to think your victims are just bots but something tells me they would figure it out.

You *can* get revenge on a dedicated ganker if you were able to kill a certain "isk dollar amount" of his assets that was more balanced. We all know the loss of one catalyst/tornado etc is not enough to deter and in fact, the low cost of these ships ensures profitable activity.


You still don't understand gankers. This isn't an ISK war. By making it one you give us a weapon that we can ALWAYS beat you with. CCP has already made it unprofitable except in the case of freighters.

We kill you for our own reasons. The New Order has its reasons. The other gankers have theirs. I even have my own. Making ISK isn't one of them. I enjoy the setup, the warp in, the kill and the escape. Doing it RIGHT isn't easy or all that common. I've had people on the forum argue that I can't solo Rets in .7 systems. I've killed hundreds.

If you want right now, you can sit outside of Kino VII-13 and try to shoot me when I come out, try to kill my pod when I come back or even try to figure out where I'm ganking and sit there and shoot me when I arrive. Its possible to do and there are people who are good at it. Most people fail miserably because I am accounting for it.

But you can never deter me in an ISK war. Even putting aside the New Order stuff, I kill miners because I like to.

You are barking up the wrong asteroid.


So what if we changed the mechanics for -10 toons to make your life a little more challenging? Would it still be fun? Methinks not if you started failing more regularly.

This is the key point (not that I have all the answers): You do it because you can and cannot be stopped. The idea is to make that a little bit more difficult for you so that you rethink this calculus. Ideally, those with rights on you would be able to effectively implement the mechanism so it would be PvP, not Person versus those with No Effective Recourse.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#70 - 2013-09-11 23:16:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:

So what if we changed the mechanics for -10 toons to make your life a little more challenging? Would it still be fun? Methinks not if you started failing more regularly.

This is the key point (not that I have all the answers): You do it because you can and cannot be stopped. The idea is to make that a little bit more difficult for you so that you rethink this calculus. Ideally, those with rights on you would be able to effectively implement the mechanism so it would be PvP, not Person versus those with No Effective Recourse.

You do have an effective recourse, for example information regarding the identity of both alts and mains of many of the Knights of the New Order is publicly available, the Code. alliance is wardeccable and they welcome fights, you could try actually fitting a tank if you're mining. You could not fit bling to a Tengu, you could actually set known gankers to terrible standings so that they show in local etc.

You could create an alt and infiltrate corps that do ganking, and then awox them.. oh wait no you can't, CCP just made that a ToS violation to protect the stupid.

Any mechanics you can think of to ease the plight of the common or garden carebear, can, and will be used against them by their predators, the gankers.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Allahu Akbar Abudabie
Korrupted
#71 - 2013-09-11 23:42:24 UTC
ALLAHU AKBAR!

Let them tears flow free.
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#72 - 2013-09-12 00:08:35 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Ah, a harvest of tears. Nurse, he looks a little sad. I'll sign a 5150 for his own protection.


Based on your OP I think you're confused about who is crying.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#73 - 2013-09-12 00:20:48 UTC
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Ah, a harvest of tears. Nurse, he looks a little sad. I'll sign a 5150 for his own protection.


Based on your OP I think you're confused about who is crying.



Got it, a civil discussion of game mechanics is "crying" but gankers desperate to preserve the status quo are not.
Donbe Scurred
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2013-09-12 01:23:23 UTC
No, continuing a pointless discussion for this long is what is considered crying.

You lost a 700m isk poorly fit Tengu to 4 properly fit and organized thrashers and the two bling mods just happened to drop. They took a risk ganking you and just happened to make profit because the loot fairies looked kindly upon them, you act like the gankers get the drop everytime, they do not.

What everyone is trying to tell you is that you should concentrate more on taking the correct preventative measures and play the game the way it is designed instead of trying to convince everyone that the mechanics need to change instead of your poor tactics.
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#75 - 2013-09-12 02:48:24 UTC
Donbe Scurred wrote:
No, continuing a pointless discussion for this long is what is considered crying.

You lost a 700m isk poorly fit Tengu to 4 properly fit and organized thrashers and the two bling mods just happened to drop. They took a risk ganking you and just happened to make profit because the loot fairies looked kindly upon them, you act like the gankers get the drop everytime, they do not.

What everyone is trying to tell you is that you should concentrate more on taking the correct preventative measures and play the game the way it is designed instead of trying to convince everyone that the mechanics need to change instead of your poor tactics.



Please explain why a discussion of game mechanics is pointless?

Is there some other reason why CCP operates these forums?
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#76 - 2013-09-12 04:10:46 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
CCP has been dealing with ganking for over a decade by now. I daresay the current balance is pretty well defined and refined.

/Thread.


Sorry dude, not your call.

We can give CCP the benefit of the doubt and assume they keep a close eye on this...or is it that the victims have no recourse and risk harassment for posting in the forums about it so keep quiet and instead have a choice to:

1. Let other players leech off of their effort and pay extortion fees.

2. Abandon their current game play even though it has the most minimal economic impact on others (ie missioning) and relocate (not likely to be a solution).

3. Or completely alter their game play as if you can't beat them, join them?



Regardless, the question remains: Why have Kill Rights if they accomplish virtually *nothing* as far as deterring ganking and rewarding the victims?
'Cause it makes CCP laugh?

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#77 - 2013-09-12 04:14:27 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
This is how sociopaths commonly view things. "It's their fault people worked hard for something. I just steal stuff because I can."


At which Ivy League university did you receive your psychology degree?



Actually it is my Medical Degree that was granted to me by the University of California. Do you have any more questions?

And do you commonly make medical diagnosis without taking a history, or even meeting with the patient? Over the internet? Or is this just a special one-off violation of ethics?

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc
Plastic Psycho
Necro-Economics
#78 - 2013-09-12 04:22:30 UTC
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
CCP has been dealing with ganking for over a decade by now. I daresay the current balance is pretty well defined and refined.

/Thread.


Sorry dude, not your call.

We can give CCP the benefit of the doubt and assume they keep a close eye on this...or is it that the victims have no recourse and risk harassment for posting in the forums about it so keep quiet and instead have a choice to:

1. Let other players leech off of their effort and pay extortion fees.

2. Abandon their current game play even though it has the most minimal economic impact on others (ie missioning) and relocate (not likely to be a solution).

3. Or completely alter their game play as if you can't beat them, join them?



Regardless, the question remains: Why have Kill Rights if they accomplish virtually *nothing* as far as deterring ganking and rewarding the victims?
And your games design credentials are... What?

I see that you make a (frankly, rather dubious) claim to have a medical degree. That makes you a games design expert, how?
CCP decade+ experience > your unsubstantiated claims.
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#79 - 2013-09-12 04:48:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Aldus Dumbledore
Plastic Psycho wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Plastic Psycho wrote:
CCP has been dealing with ganking for over a decade by now. I daresay the current balance is pretty well defined and refined.

/Thread.


Sorry dude, not your call.

We can give CCP the benefit of the doubt and assume they keep a close eye on this...or is it that the victims have no recourse and risk harassment for posting in the forums about it so keep quiet and instead have a choice to:

1. Let other players leech off of their effort and pay extortion fees.

2. Abandon their current game play even though it has the most minimal economic impact on others (ie missioning) and relocate (not likely to be a solution).

3. Or completely alter their game play as if you can't beat them, join them?



Regardless, the question remains: Why have Kill Rights if they accomplish virtually *nothing* as far as deterring ganking and rewarding the victims?
And your games design credentials are... What?

I see that you make a (frankly, rather dubious) claim to have a medical degree. That makes you a games design expert, how?
CCP decade+ experience > your unsubstantiated claims.


What are your credentials to question me?

See how easy that is?

Doctors play games like everyone else. I am free to offer my opinion and discuss game mechanics like everyone else permitted to post on these forums.

Take it or leave it, means nothing to me.
Aldus Dumbledore
The Covenant of Blood
#80 - 2013-09-12 04:59:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Aldus Dumbledore
silens vesica wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
Rhes wrote:
Aldus Dumbledore wrote:
This is how sociopaths commonly view things. "It's their fault people worked hard for something. I just steal stuff because I can."


At which Ivy League university did you receive your psychology degree?



Actually it is my Medical Degree that was granted to me by the University of California. Do you have any more questions?

And do you commonly make medical diagnosis without taking a history, or even meeting with the patient? Over the internet? Or is this just a special one-off violation of ethics?


A Diagnosis is a formal Medical Legal Document signed by a physician after a physical examination and history. I am perfectly free to offer an opinion of an anonymous statement posted on the internet based on it's similarity to known and characterized personality disorders.

The only way I could make a diagnosis (a legal document) is after a formal interview with a real human being. I offered no such medical opinion which is a chart entry of the various DSM criteria met and frankly, it's a little silly to suggest I did so of what is an anonymous internet toon posting in a public forum. What I did do was present as vaguely as is prudent my credentials for making that assessment of one of the posted comments in rebuttal to a challenge. You can take it or leave it as well.

Furthermore, I am under no ethical constraint to not call out an anonymous statement on the internet for what it sounds like just like anyone else. I can even add lols, rofl, lmao, luls, herp a derp like anyone else if I choose to wear an internet tard hat like most around here.

What I said is an open statement: "This is what sociopaths sound like..." and offered a similar statement that was a paraphrase of the post. That is not remotely a formal diagnosis of a human being.