Crime & Punishment

Here's where all this is eventually going to lead in regards to hi-sec ganking. This is the way I see it:

1. Ganking has existed for a very long time
2. No one is saying that the solution to the problem of hi-sec ganking is to prevent all or any means of ganking
3. There are people who rage about getting ganked, there are others who accept it's part of the game

To have an open and honest debate about the issue is usally ignored on the forums by the gankers. Their responses always lay blame at the pilots who got ganked, and their solutions are based off of in game mechanics, and it's not that these solutions are not credible. Yes, pilots would be better off with a scout, they would be better off to travel in groups, they would be better off to use JF's.

The problem is that there is no understanding, at least spoken or written on the forums, where all this is going to lead eventually. If gankers ignore the fact that there is an exploitation of game mechanics in regards to hi-sec then eventually CCP will step in and change it. The solution that would allow both sides to continue the game is somewhere in between, and until gankers acknowledge this they are on a path that will take away an aspect of Eve that they find enjoyable, and as they should. This game provides so many different ways to play, and those who are calling for reforms are not saying that ganking shouldn't be allowed, at least not en masse.

I believe that two simple solutions to this current issue is to remove aggro against freighters, allowing they to log off safely, and to reduce the log off safely timer depending on which security status system you are in.

Now, I already see the ganker drivel responses that are coming my way, so go ahead, it's a free forum, respond with blaming 'gankees', etc. like usual. What you have to accept though is that CCP is a business, and if you think for one second that CCP is going to allow the players of their game dictate the ebb and flow of bringing in new business, or cancelled subscriptions, all in the name of "well Eve is being played the way it was intended" then you are incredibly mistaken, and here's why:

1. If game mechanics is being employed successfully on all fronts then why is there hi-sec? There is an implied safety that comes with being in .5 systems or higher.

2. Why is there Concord? There is an element of game mechanics that CCP intended to prevent people from blowing up ships in high sec.

*don't just quote the above two points, you are missing the intent which is below*

I could go on but these two brief points show an intended difference between null/low/high sec systems. To ignore this is going to cause hi sec gankers to be incredibly upset when the business side of CCP kicks in. Yes, this debate has raged on for years, but the one thing no one can ignore is that CCP has changed aspects of the game for the past decade because they do in fact listen to their players. If the end result is going to be do nothing and lose subscriptions then you are mistaken on the intent of CCP, at least the business side of it. CCP has proven they will modify when needed or when they think it will improve the overall experience of the majority of their players.

The last year has seen an incredible change in null sec systems, and the emphasis from Dev posts has been because they are trying to get more people into null sec. Don't be shocked if one day an update rolls out and eliminates aspects of ganking that ganking fan-boys didn't see coming.

I believe ganking should be allowed in hi-sec, I truly do. Modifying small aspects, no aggro for freighters, shorter log off safely timer, would not prevent ganking against bots, or afk auto-pilots.

I don't expect an outpouring of gankers saying, "wow... this post has changed my perspective entirely, thank you!" I know the trolls will come out instead, and at the end of the day the true change will come from CCP, not in game players who decide to no longer gank or change who they gank. With the rise of CODE though ganking has taken on a new form, and it's one that will no longer be ignored by Devs. Remember, CCP is the one who installed the log off safely feature in the first place... do you truly believe that this is the last and final action they are willing to take?

Ram

So then my rights are effected when they maliciously abuse the petition system by reporting a legitimate in game action.

No, your rights are not affected by another player exercising their right to report harassment. They may be affected if CCP later decide to make changes to the game based on that, but that's the game bro.

Except that's not what's being discussed here. What is being discussed here is that code grief players and that's borderline at best. EVE is not designed so a bunch of antisocial basement dwellers can get kicks out of upsetting other people.

Honestly though, if you truly think that code purposely attacking players to upset them, trolling them and "harvesting tears" is not a problem, then what do you have to worry about when people file support tickets when they feel harassed?

But if you're not so sure, and that's why you're arguing repeatedly against people rights to file support tickets in the game they pay for

Those backsystem null rats won't farm themselves. Get back to work!

Dude, not cool. Theyre feelings are being hurt. Thats worse than physical violence.

Are you being tortured? If so you need to call ripard teg right now so he can defend your space human rights.

To clarify:

1. If game mechanics is being employed successfully on all fronts then why is there hi-sec? There is an implied safety that comes with being in .5 systems or higher.

2. Why is there Concord? There is an element of game mechanics that CCP intended to prevent people from blowing up ships in high sec.


I had this in a previous post but after reading it I think I need to clarify this, in the hopes that the ganker fan-boys will begin to understand the mind of those who are against the gank. My first point holds true, there is an element of safety that comes with hi-sec, to ignore that is ridiculous. It doesn't mean that you cannot get blow'd up in hi sec, obviously you can. There are duels, war dec's, aggro from stealing from wrecks, etc. However, this is not what is being discussed, we're specifically looking at ganking freighters/haulers. So you cannot say that there is not implied safety due to the fact that you cannot fire on someone else without one of the previous things discussed allowing you to do so. Simply admit there is an element of safety and we can move on.

Concord - Yes, with the implied safety of hi sec, Concord is there to prevent pilots from attacking others without repercussions... why? Because low sec and null sec exist, and this is definitely part of the game mechanics built specifically for those systems. You can still attack, be attacked, etc., in high sec, and no one is clamoring for that aspect to change.

So to all the gankers, very few pilots who are against ganking are specifically saying that ganking should be banned.

I think ganking is just fine, but just not fine the way it is. I don't want to ban ganking, I just think it should be more appropriate towards the level of security system you are in. Removing aggro from a freighter is one idea, and so is reducing the amount of time for the log off safety feature.

Guess what this allows!!! You can still gank, and you'll get freighter pilots who are afk, autopilots, and bot freighters. All this does is allow freighter pilots who are in hi-sec a means of keeping their assets.

The gankers need to start thinking up some ways for an in-between solution to this, because if they rely on CCP to do it then they won't like the result.

Here is possible outcomes that could come down in the future:

1. Concord is allowed to attack pods (this could be a definite since this would not prevent ganking, but a ganking squad would now have to be more than a mere handful of pilots jumping into Catalysts or other cheap destroyers) Remember, there are no more skillpoints to buy for clones, so CCP could view blowing up pods as an even exchange.

2. CCP removes all aggro for capital ships in high sec - allowing them to log off safely

I actually think option #1 is the best outcome since it doesn't prevent ganking, it merely changes the size of a required squad, and gives freighter pilots the ability to fit to withstand a larger attack.

All in all, if the only responses from gankers is going to be, "you're stupid, play better. you're dumb, play smarter" then when the changes come there will be a shock. I don't believe for one second that gankers right now will implement self-discipline changes, it will have to come from CCP, but if gankers refuse to view the other side of the coin then they are removing themselves from the changes and discussion that will eventually come.

This is someone who can see past his own nose.

The way the game's economy works is that if you fly ships at all, the economy doesn't just like it if you die, it mandates that you die. Getting blown up is what turns the wheels of the game's economy.

And making freighters 100% safe is not a good step to take no matter what flimsy justifications the risk averse try and put forth. Freighters, like every other ship, exist to die.