CSM Campaigns

Ok then, what changes would make an escort more useful to protect a freighter? Any ideas that could make even a small escort completely protect a freighter from a gank?

There are already some strategies you can use like ECM, repping or webbing a freighter into warp, but maybe there is something else that would be more useful?

I agree people who go to the trouble of hiring an escort/bringing friends should be much safer from a gank. What additional game mechanics could we add to the game to make this happen?

A self destruct module that is guaranteed to destroy ALL cargo and fittings? If not AFK... then no profit for gankers!

1. Check route (F10 is great at this and so is Dotlan).
2. Don't carry over 500m/isk worth of space stuff; 1b/isk tops.
3. Fit tank, I hear Reinforced Bulkheads work wonders.
4. Use a web; despite what you say about the dueling issue... You only need to duel request once if you do it right.

As an active Bumping Mach pilot there are 2 ways to make me avoid you and both of those are listed above. Stop being lazy.

Does LOYALANON know that?

I'm more interested in what Tora has to say about wardeccs than about ganking. Right now my impression is that wardeccs are close to useless. Smart defenders just roll corp, or stick to NPC corps. The only ones who actually fight are the ones run by egocentric CEOs exploiting new players. There is no punishment for just docking up and playing on alts for a week. This makes wars effectively worthless in highsec. Do you have any proposals other than making it more expensive to wardecc small corps, which is easily exploitable and doesn't really deal with how fundamentally useless wars are right now?

I had a productive conversation with Tora today about ganking, and it sounds like he is willing to consider counter points on this. That said, I am still trying to decide if I would vote for him or not. Please keep in mind that he specified that those restrictions would only apply to gankers in NPC corps, but it is obvious that he is not particularly familiar with ganking mechanics as they pertain to negative sec status gankers.

This.

Contrary to what someone else has said, anybody that supports the idea of content generation and competetive gameplay in HS should NOT vote for Tora.

No, out of principle.

+1

Not too sure about your solutions but at least you acknowledge there is a problem with the interaction between gankees and the gankers. Passively tanking ships in order to prevent ganks is as dull as dishwater and places all the power with the gankers, who may choose to or not to gank your ship at a time that suits them.

So an interesting candidate for highsec.

I'm not the one complaining about 'how bad things are in EVE' sir, that seems to be your department. In fact, I think EVE is in the best state in years currently.

But for your pleasure, a less sarcastic reply on your idea of having a 1 minute (or any lenght of time) non-dock timer for 'stealing':

As with your non-dock timer for gankers, the effect will be the same. Hiding in safespots but even easier, as the looter will still be in his ship which will most probably be fitted with a cloak now. Warp to safe spot, cloak, scratch your nut sack 2 times and dock up. Even easier than sitting out the 1 minute timer after a gank (which you can't do cloaked). It will not add any opportunity to catch thieves that isn't already there. It will not motivate ppl who aren't willing to hunt thieves NOW to do so AFTER your proposed change. So again: no gameplay added, just made it a bit more tedious (again) for hi sec pirates/thieves/gankers/whatever you want to call them, one step closer again to 'nerfing EVE to death'.

Not only will no gameplay be added by this idea, it will raise the threshhold for newer players to get into stuff like piracy. To noobs that not yet have any understanding of safe spots, insta-undocks and docks, a one minute no docking timer can look pretty off putting I can imagine.

Your ideas on high sec criminal offenses fit nicely into the "One More Nerf"-category. You say "I want there to be ganking, I want there to be stealing, but it's just to easy now so let's nerf it (again)." After your ideas are implemented, there will still be ganking and thieving and surprised by that, the carebear community will once again ask for "One More Nerf", continuing this cycle until hi sec criminal behavior is scrapped from the game mechanics or becomes so tedious hardly anyone bothers with it anymore, effectively scrapping it from the game. After that will come the whining about someone else mining 'your' asteroid (seriously, I've seen miners complain about that numerous times in the chat channels), shooting 'your' mission rats, running 'your' site (again, complained about frequently in chats) etc etc.

As for being a CSM. I don't expect any CSM to have perfect ideas and answers to every (percieved) 'problem'. But if you're positioning yourself as "hi sec candidate" I do expect you to be in touch with the hi sec playerbase (that includes hi sec criminals) and have some vision on how ideas work out in practice. Which you seem to lack completely.. That's not me trying to insult you or defending my own ganking interests, I'm just telling you how your ideas will affect the game, not in a good manner....

As for freighter ganking, how on earth is that 'too easy'? Even with antitanked freighters you still need a sizeable fleet to take one out. You can't just undock on your own saying "think I'm gonna gank me a freighter to kill some time all by myself with just my 2 alts!". If it was that easy, we'd be seeing a lot more of it.

Loot nerf so ppl won't gank for profit anymore? Well, it might surprise you but contrary to popular carebear beliefs most ganks are not carried out for profit, any profit is just gravy for most.

On ganking nerfs in general: every time you make it harder to gank something the reaction from the ganking community will be the same: more organized ganking (the irony) and more attention paid to weaker targets. Nerf freighter ganking, more attention will go to smaller targets like mission runners, miners, industrials, shuttles, pods etc etc. In general, it will be more targeted at noobs too. I myself have little problem with ganking noobs (gank 'm while they are young so they learn early what EVE is about and decreasing the chance they will become theme park minded carebears), but you will be increasing the gap between older players (who can fly tanked fast freighters and T2 tanked blockade runners and transports) and the young who have little knowledge of damage mechanics and tanking and aren't able to fly and fit stuff that will reduce their chance of being killed yet. I think EVE can do without anything else that will give more advantages to older players and will shaft the younger players.

In a nutshell, I think your ideas are bad and not well thought out. Not bad as in "well, the core principle is good but we need to tweak the numbers a bit to keep it balanced", no, I think the core principle are bad, for reasons I have stated.