These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#341 - 2014-06-12 11:34:40 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

I remember a certain someone (not you) complaining about how ganking was nerfed into the ground and constantly banging on that believe. Blink


It has.

I remember what MOo got up to.


And what would be gained from returning back to the state where m0o was possible? You already have Burn Jita these days, which is in no way different from m0o's blockades.


Um, no.

Several hundred people attacking one system for a week, is not equivalent to a dozen or so people completely blockading an area for 7 weeks, to the point where the devs themselves attacked them to force them off.

There is an order of magnitude's difference between what you can achieve now, to what you could before. And you need twenty or thirty times as many people to even come close.

To compare the two is patently ridiculous.

"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.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#342 - 2014-06-12 12:11:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Then why bring it up to begin with?

As demonstrated a little bit earlier in the thread, nothing was nerfed for gankers this time. Instead, these changes made it easier to gank by a lot.
There are also much more effective ways to "protect the daft and greedy players from themselves", and that is to starve them to death and into submission to the real purpose of the game: Go out and live in 00 sec. If you'd use 00 sec as it is intended to be used, High sec would be a lot less appealing space to live in for many more players (not for all, because that's impossible for numerous reasons) and more people would accumulate in 00 sec, creating a similarly busy atmosphere there with targets to fight and to gank without any Concord intervention. Ganking in High sec, however, does not achieve that at all. It's just a method for some to get easy kills.
This ideal state, however - while is often proclaimed and demanded -, apparently is not what the players want to achieve. They want to keep the state of the things with their predictable patterns, usual people to blame and shame, safety and easy kills and life. Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#343 - 2014-06-12 12:44:14 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Then why bring it up to begin with?


Because the very premise of the thread is to nerf ganking.

And we are demonstrating that nothing in the game's history besides the Drake has been nerfed more than ganking.

"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.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#344 - 2014-06-12 13:26:50 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Then why bring it up to begin with?


Because the very premise of the thread is to nerf ganking.

And we are demonstrating that nothing in the game's history besides the Drake has been nerfed more than ganking.


On the premise to kick you out of high sec into the space that you should make your own. Yet, whatever CCP does, people come back to High sec.
Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#345 - 2014-06-12 13:32:31 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

On the premise to kick you out of high sec into the space that you should make your own. Yet, whatever CCP does, people come back to High sec.


If you're actually going to open the can of worms about forcing people out of highsec, then I have a few ideas to offer to that respect.


Quote:

Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.


Reverting or easing off one or two of the several dozens nerfs to ganking in the last eleven years is not going to lead to an outcome where a dozen guys can shut down half of highsec until the developers have to go shoot them.

Even suggesting that it would strains credulity.

"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.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#346 - 2014-06-12 14:11:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.


Reverting or easing off one or two of the several dozens nerfs to ganking in the last eleven years is not going to lead to an outcome where a dozen guys can shut down half of highsec until the developers have to go shoot them.

Even suggesting that it would strains credulity.


Saying it would not happen is ignoring the reality of the game. I wonder who is more credulous.

It would, probably, not be the case with only 12 people; however, nothing these days stays with just a small number of people if it just gains enough publicity in the game (notorious examples: BJ, CCP's low sec events, CCP roams, CCP public (story) events, player driven super carrier events), whatever easy content can be harnessed without much own effort (and ignoring the effort of those who organized it), will be harnessed and will lead to an explosion in participation.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#347 - 2014-06-12 14:29:55 UTC
So increased player interaction is a bad thing if it might involve shooting people?

"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.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#348 - 2014-06-12 14:42:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
So increased player interaction is a bad thing if it might involve shooting people?


I knew that was coming. Big smile

No, it is not bad in itself. Yes, it is bad, because it happens and more and more people want it to happen in places where players are not absolutely free to do what they want to do and then complain about it. For the rest on how I think about that, read my other posts. Blink

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#349 - 2014-06-12 14:51:35 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
So increased player interaction is a bad thing if it might involve shooting people?


I knew that was coming. Big smile

No, it is not bad in itself. Yes, it is bad, because it happens and more and more people want it to happen in places where players are not absolutely free to do what they want to do and then complain about it. For the rest on how I think about that, read my other posts. Blink


I... what the hell are you even talking about?

Actually playing the game is bad, if it happens in highsec? Or is that just because people are thumbless stooges who cry if they get blown up? Gotta say, that last one is not exactly a bad thing.

Anyway, back onto some semblance of the topic.

You claimed that buffing ganking in any way would bring us back to the days of m0o shutting down entire regions with a dozen people.

I claim that's a wild over exaggeration. In fact, I propose that highsec is too safe as a result of too many iterative buffs to safety over the last eleven years, and that it's about time some of those were scaled back. I also think that reducing safety in highsec would be a better move than simply reducing the profitability of highsec, as it's risk/reward is badly skewed.

"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.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#350 - 2014-06-12 15:03:57 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
So increased player interaction is a bad thing if it might involve shooting people?


I knew that was coming. Big smile

No, it is not bad in itself. Yes, it is bad, because it happens and more and more people want it to happen in places where players are not absolutely free to do what they want to do and then complain about it. For the rest on how I think about that, read my other posts. Blink

Anyway, back onto some semblance of the topic.

You claimed that buffing ganking in any way would bring us back to the days of m0o shutting down entire regions with a dozen people.


Please read my post again and then read your post again. You might find the error in your post.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

I claim that's a wild over exaggeration. In fact, I propose that highsec is too safe as a result of too many iterative buffs to safety over the last eleven years, and that it's about time some of those were scaled back. I also think that reducing safety in highsec would be a better move than simply reducing the profitability of highsec, as it's risk/reward is badly skewed.


You are not better than the rest of the game and keep the game in its sorry state. Congratulations for that achievement.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#351 - 2014-06-12 15:11:35 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Please read my post again and then read your post again. You might find the error in your post.


Quote:
Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.


There you go. At least own your own words.

Buffing ganking does not equate to bringing the game to a halt. It equates to finally bringing balance back to the game, after ganking has been over nerfed over the years.

Quote:

You are not better than the rest of the game and keep the game in its sorry state. Congratulations for that achievement.


That is literally a nonsense statement. Please try again.

"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.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#352 - 2014-06-12 15:20:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Please read my post again and then read your post again. You might find the error in your post.


Quote:
Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.


There you go. At least own your own words.


I cannot see any reference to "12 people" in that post. But I can point you to post #346, where I stated that it is not likely being done with 12 people, quite in contrast it would be done with a lot more people.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Fragglewump
Dust514.
#353 - 2014-06-12 15:26:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#354 - 2014-06-12 15:26:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Please read my post again and then read your post again. You might find the error in your post.


Quote:
Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.


There you go. At least own your own words.


I cannot see any reference to "12 people" in that post. But I can point you to post #346, where I stated that it is not likely being done with 12 people.


Do you actually have a clue who m0o was? Or are you just repeating an old, scary name some other person told you about?

There is no way that buffing ganking a bit to compensate for the absurd nerfs it's eaten over the last eleven years will enable a 12 man gatecamp to shut down an entire region for 3 weeks and get two and a half thousand kills.

Even saying things like
Quote:
And what would be gained from returning back to the state where m0o was possible? You already have Burn Jita these days, which is in no way different from m0o's blockades.


just goes to show how ignorant you really are of the entire subject.

"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.
#355 - 2014-06-12 15:28:06 UTC
Reverting one of the dozens of buffs to highsec safety would not equate to "returning back to the state where m0o was possible".

Now knock off the trolling, for once.

"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.
#356 - 2014-06-12 15:30:10 UTC
Fragglewump wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=350708&find=unread


Lmao.

I beg of you, please try that, so you can see the results. Then perhaps you will realize where your place is in this game.

"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.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#357 - 2014-06-12 15:32:26 UTC
Fragglewump wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=350708&find=unread



well, that's an awesome idea ... I'll just ramp up my production to fill the void you're leaving ... and charge extra Twisted

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#358 - 2014-06-12 15:41:05 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Please read my post again and then read your post again. You might find the error in your post.


Quote:
Also, m0o was not so much about ganking in itself, but more about making this game come to a grinding still... I am quite sure that easier ganking in High sec to facilitate this kind of outcome would be quite frustrating for all involved.


There you go. At least own your own words.


I cannot see any reference to "12 people" in that post. But I can point you to post #346, where I stated that it is not likely being done with 12 people.


Do you actually have a clue who m0o was? Or are you just repeating an old, scary name some other person told you about?

There is no way that buffing ganking a bit to compensate for the absurd nerfs it's eaten over the last eleven years will enable a 12 man gatecamp to shut down an entire region for 3 weeks and get two and a half thousand kills.


You are so fixated on the "12 people" that you completely shut out any other though about the matter m0o; for instance, thinking about that the concept of shutting down regions again can be made workable again. It does not matter if it's possible with 12 or 200, it's the concept behind that matters and that it can be employed in High sec in a way it is not as easily employable in Low sec and 00 sec because of the very well known features of these areas. But please keep on denying the reality and disagree, it's your right to do that.

You, as so many other people, are also so fixated about changing High sec that you seemingly completely shut off any thought process about the other areas of the game, which are in a much more dire need of change. But please, in all sandbox fashion, keep on trying to make High sec as terrible as Low sec and 00 sec are. Lowering the standards is also a way to improve a machine.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#359 - 2014-06-12 15:49:16 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
It does not matter if it's possible with 12 or 200


It matters a lot, actually. You can't just gloss over that. I can't shut down a region with 12 guys right now. Unless they removed CONCORD, and even if they did, pretty sure I couldn't pull that off.


Quote:

You, as so many other people, are also so fixated about changing High sec that you seemingly completely shut off any thought process about the other areas of the game, which are in a much more dire need of change. But please, in all sandbox fashion, keep on trying to make High sec as terrible as Low sec and 00 sec are. Lowering the standards is also a way to improve a machine.


And then comes the part where half of the problems of the other regions of space, are because highsec is too competitive, in safety, in personal income, and until the next patch, manufacturing capability too.

CCP, fortunately for the future of the game, has finally realized that the stranglehold highsec has on the rest of the game is unhealthy for everyone.

"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.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#360 - 2014-06-12 16:36:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Even if ur a carebear, ganking is a good thing.

if u can get other carebears ganked while u urself survive, u will make more money.

the 'sorry state' is how numb haulers have become

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs