Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

When Anthar made the original suggestion back in June last year, CCP were planning to introduce changes to fleet warp making it impossible to fleet warp onto scan results:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/fleet-warp-changes-coming-in-august-release/

So Anthar's suggestion was primarily aimed (from the OP in the post) on ensuring warp in points on grid remain during lowsec/nullsec fights:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=431120&find=unread

It's very common to pop wrecks so that an opponent can't easily warp to you or nearby. Giving the wrecks more HP is good for low/null fights and gives more opportunities to maneuver on grid.

So there is a real reason and it is a good change.

Additionally, if I was speculating, this change might be part of the changes CCP are working on so they can implement changes to the fleet warp mechanics they wanted to before. When they pulled back from those changes, CCP Larrikin indicated the main issue was technical based around fleet bookmarks, but that the idea was still very much in planning. So this may be part of that development process to allow fleet warp changes, but just speculation on that.

No, it doesn't. A buff to a playstyle isn't a nerf to another. The fact that more people would be able to fight back would mean that at times you'd have more to compete with, but the act of ganking itself would be unchanged.

Except obviously it isn't, since they have to avoid the system if there is a gank event in it. If the steps protected them they would fly right on through.

Except again, all that shows is that:
a) freighter runs outnumber gank attempts
and
b) red-frog make sure they are less appealing targets

Again though, this changes nothing about the fact that anti-ganking as a playstyle is pretty much pointless as it stands because it's so out of balance.

By not being chosen as targets. By running with lower value cargo and webbing the freighter, the difficulty of the gank is increased and the reward lowered, so the gankers simply pick easier and more rewarding targets. As there are so many freighter runs, they can opt to be selective about their targets.

And no, I'm suggestign CCP actually make it a viable playstyle. If you want to prove it already is and it's purely down to a lack of skill, by all means start up and anti-ganking group and prove it. You won't though because you know it's a lot of effort with nearly no chance of success for nearly no reward. Instead you'll keep pointing at red frog and using their stats as an excuse for why your already easy playstyle should be easier.

So what you are saying is that since anti-ganking isn't actually viable, more people should instead just gank, and gank cheap disposable ships at that? I'd like to see diversity in playstyles, not just more of the exact same playstyle.

Again I ask though, if EVE is supposed to be a game about being tough, challenging and unforgiving, why are you so afraid of having to put in a bit of effort to fight off an opposing group on a level playing field?

Well it wouldn;t. A nerf to ganking would affect ganking regardless of what other people did. Halving the damage of people with a criminal timer for example, that is a nerf to ganking. Buffing an opposing playstyle may make you have to work harder to compete with that playstyle, but it's no more a nerf to ganking than improving missions is a nerf to incursions.

Yes, their warning message on their site every time Burn Jita is in effect and the size of their freight queue at the same time.

How many times does it have to be said. Anti-ganking != Freighters taking steps to avoid being ganked. If you're suggesting the only way to protect a freighter is to get in the freighter, choose the correct amount of cargo and the correct route and use a web alt, then you aren't talking about anti-ganking as a playstyle, you are talking about hauling as a playstyle. You're proving my point because you can't come up with a good counterpoint which is why you're going ham on this strawman.

I tell you what, I'll make it simple. Any reference to red frog I'll simply ignore, since we're not talking about the hauling playstyle.

Hardly, losing two nados over a nearly zero chance of actually popping the wreck in time with a guaranteed zero return has nothing to do with wanting easy gameplay, it's basic common sense. Plus, like the change would be fine if they improved other aspects of anti-ganking to compensate, making it a more viable playstyle. You however want to make sure that noone even has a chance to disrupt your easy, profitable gameplay. There's a distinct difference. Thanks for again not answering the question though, since it just further proves the point.

I'm not, I'm suggesting a buff to an opposing playstyle, not nerfs to ganking. You know this, yet you'll keep pretending it's something else because you can't come up with a godo reason as to why you should have no opposing team to compete against.

That's still not anti-ganking. Avoiding being the target of something and fighting against the act in general are not the same thing. I tend do drink zero sugar drinks, that doesn't make me anti-sugar.

No, they have turned hauling into a profitable business. But since we're still not talking about hauling, it's still irrelevant.

I choose to ignore people wasting my time with obvious strawmen.

Even targeting with a single instalock frigate only manages to blap the wreck as it is now a small amount of the time. Are you suggesting that coordinating two ships won't fail more often than a single ship does currently?

Then prove it. You keep claiming that it's all down to skill yet you refuse to prove it, and by some miracle not a single other skilled players has managed to prove it either. According to you, everything is balanced but for some unknown reason, skilled players gravitate towards ganking and completely avoid anti-ganking. Do you not know how ridiculous that sounds?

Newsflash buddy, you're not a skilled player, you simply pick easy tasks. And you're an NPC alt to boot.

Doesn't sound ridiculous at all, anti-ganking is what sounds ridiculous. Why would anyone want to prevent explosions?



I post with my scout because when I created him he was meant to be my main, but things drifted. Problem?

It's more about redirecting explosions. I strongly believe that everything in EVE should be open to a player based counter, that one group trying to shoot something should have to fight against the opposing group trying to defend it. As the mechanics currently stand this isn't something that happens with ganking. Gankers are generally just fighting against the decisions the target made before they even undocked. It's very passive. I'd love to see more focus put on people actively defending their ships from ganks, and in the long run if anti-ganking were to be more viable, a reduction in the mechanical safety of haulers and miners who refuse to actively prevent their ship exploding.

Generally when people post with their NPC alts they aren't really the best people to have a reasonable discussion with as they have no reason to really stand by what they say.

Except of course I didn't, since once again you are talking about hauling, not about anti-ganking. Thanks once again for proving my point by being unable to come up with an argument beyond your strawman.

Yes it does cover everything from cargo blow up to people removing the contract before it was finished.

"No no no all of those successful freight trips don't count because they took steps to counter gankers and didn't die"

Hey guy, is this a post about CODE. and aanti-ganking?
No it's a post about wreck hp buff... and that concerns everyone ingame.
The ONLY people I saw hating on this buff is AG.

Now let's get back on the main subject, before this gets locked up because of off-topic posting....