These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[February] Wreck Hitpoint Rebalance

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#281 - 2016-02-09 15:16:44 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
What if they made ganking in general easier but gave people more tools to actively defend ships so that there was a much more active and dynamic fight?
Highsec really isn't the place for active and dynamic fighting.

Crimewatch mechanics are there so PVErs can largely mind their own business in highsec with a greatly reduced chance of PVP.

CONCORD and the Police are there to hinder PVP, not to make it flourish. Roll

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#282 - 2016-02-09 15:18:58 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Just had a look at zkill, most recent freighter kills, first page.

18 out of 22 were either not tanked or 'anti-tanked' (cargo expanders).

82% of freighter pilots don't even try to avoid getting ganked! Roll

This discussion is just silly, it's like saying that mechanics should change because some fool dies repeatedly trying to 1v1 a svipul in a noobship.
Of course they were, because as well they should, gankers choose the softest valuable targets. Mechanics shouldn't change because freighters die, they should change because there's no real way for anti-gankers to succeed. It should be a battle between the two opposing sides, but currently that battle is massively in favour of the ganker, so much so that they ridicule the anti-gankers while they are doing the gank. In my mind, the ideal outcome would be that the same amount of freighters are ganked, but there are more gank attempts and more fighting between the two sides. Ganking should be cheaper in the instances where there's no effort to prevent the gank but more expensive when there is.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#283 - 2016-02-09 15:28:11 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
Lol are those the only time you actually ganked?
Did you ever solo gank anything or do a small freighter fleet?

If those are the only ganking events you did, you clearly have no clue about ganking lol
I've done loads of different type, I just have 20 accounts, so trying to keep track of which character did what and when isn't the easiest of tasks. I've done most types though, solo a dualbox miner ganking, solo alpha ganking autopiloters, large and small group freighter ganking, I FCed a few back during one of the interdictions too.

That said, you're attempting to attack my knowledge of ganking for what reason exactly? Even if I'd never ganked a single ship, the incredible lack of successful anti-gankers speaks of itself.

Out of curiosity, would you really be against them making anti-ganking more viable? Like under all circumstances? What if they made ganking in general easier but gave people more tools to actively defend ships so that there was a much more active and dynamic fight?

It's up to anti-gankers to make themselves relevant.
It's not CCP's job to nerf everything to make you guys relevant...

I'm all for dynamic content, but you have to understand that a bunch of lazy forum warriors won't get action until they decide to go get some.

People 4 years ago said that CODE. wouldn't last until the end of the year.
Why did they succeed? They had people with one goal to rid highsec of bots.
They worked hard to get where they are today, they adapted to every nerf CCP threw at them, that's why they're still standing.
It's the Darwin Law, only the strong survive.

That being said, CODE. started small, but AG rushed straight to a point where failure was inevitable.
So there's your inspiration for today.

So go make yourself some content

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#284 - 2016-02-09 15:36:17 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
It's up to anti-gankers to make themselves relevant.
It's not CCP's job to nerf everything to make you guys relevant...
Right, and in my opinion current mechanics make it impossible for anti-gankers to make themselves relevant. You also need to stop saying "you guys" since I don't anti-gank since I'm not a masochist. I, like most sane people, can see that there's no point in even attempting it in it's current state.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
Why did they succeed? They had people with one goal to rid highsec of bots.
This is demonstably false. CODE actually go after people who provide them with tears and tend to ignore the people that are more likely to actually be bots. In a way CODE actually support bots by removing their competition.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
So go make yourself some content
I do, by not anti-ganking. And that's a shame.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#285 - 2016-02-09 15:44:13 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
It's up to anti-gankers to make themselves relevant.
It's not CCP's job to nerf everything to make you guys relevant...
Right, and in my opinion current mechanics make it impossible for anti-gankers to make themselves relevant. You also need to stop saying "you guys" since I don't anti-gank since I'm not a masochist. I, like most sane people, can see that there's no point in even attempting it in it's current state.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
Why did they succeed? They had people with one goal to rid highsec of bots.
This is demonstably false. CODE actually go after people who provide them with tears and tend to ignore the people that are more likely to actually be bots. In a way CODE actually support bots by removing their competition.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
So go make yourself some content
I do, by not anti-ganking. And that's a shame.

You're an anti-ganker otherwise you wouldn't be unleashing a sea of salty tears

And yes, at it's humble beginnings CODE. hunted bots.
But they evolved, adapted to become what they now are

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#286 - 2016-02-09 15:55:39 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:
You're an anti-ganker otherwise you wouldn't be unleashing a sea of salty tears
Oh you're one of those people. Apologies I didn't realise. Not every opinion that opposes your own is "tears" and believe it or not it's actually possible for people to have opinions about mechanics they don't actively use.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
And yes, at it's humble beginnings CODE. hunted bots.
But they evolved, adapted to become what they now are
No, at it's humble beginnings it was a guy rageposting because CCP buffed miners. Effectively it was proof that complaining on the forums can at least to some extent work, which is why it's always funny when CODE members tell people to HFTU and stop posting on the forum. All of the "but the bots" stuff was just propaganda to turn people against miners in general, while in reality actual botters have always been the targets you are least likely to hunt.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#287 - 2016-02-09 16:07:30 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:
You're an anti-ganker otherwise you wouldn't be unleashing a sea of salty tears
Oh you're one of those people. Apologies I didn't realise. Not every opinion that opposes your own is "tears" and believe it or not it's actually possible for people to have opinions about mechanics they don't actively use.

Dom Arkaral wrote:
And yes, at it's humble beginnings CODE. hunted bots.
But they evolved, adapted to become what they now are
No, at it's humble beginnings it was a guy rageposting because CCP buffed miners. Effectively it was proof that complaining on the forums can at least to some extent work, which is why it's always funny when CODE members tell people to HFTU and stop posting on the forum. All of the "but the bots" stuff was just propaganda to turn people against miners in general, while in reality actual botters have always been the targets you are least likely to hunt.

Man, I really love the tears, keep sending them

Also, of course we don't find bots... they're all banned lmao
And those that aren't are never too far from a ban :D

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#288 - 2016-02-09 16:09:54 UTC
Roll

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#289 - 2016-02-09 17:16:28 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Right, and in my opinion current mechanics make it impossible for anti-gankers to make themselves relevant. You also need to stop saying "you guys" since I don't anti-gank since I'm not a masochist. I, like most sane people, can see that there's no point in even attempting it in it's current state.


The actual game mechanics give gankers every disadvantage. You're not looking for something to level the playing field, it's already tilted in your favour. You're looking for a win button, like killing a 500 HP wreck was, but only finding the whine button.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#290 - 2016-02-09 17:35:32 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
The actual game mechanics give gankers every disadvantage. You're not looking for something to level the playing field, it's already tilted in your favour. You're looking for a win button, like killing a 500 HP wreck was, but only finding the whine button.
If a 500 HP wreck as an I win button, then how come wrecks were still looted most of the time?

And in no way is it tilted in the favour of anti-gankers. That's the obvious truth, which you have already made clear you are unwilling (but in reality unable) to disprove. Why don;t you just be honest. You like one sided mechanics, the lack of risk and the abundant reward, and the thought of actually having to compete with other players terrifies you. That's why you're opposed to even the suggestion of balancing the mechanics.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#291 - 2016-02-09 17:35:37 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So prove it. Demonstrate how easily you can be an anti-ganker if you put the effort in and I will gladly admit defeat.


I have, RFF have shown they can reduce ganking losses down to as close to zero as you can get (less than 0.11% chance of losing to gankers).
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#292 - 2016-02-09 17:45:26 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
If a 500 HP wreck as an I win button, then how come wrecks were still looted most of the time?


Because only a few AG were even willing to take the small loss of a thrasher and a little sec, even on an alt, and the ones who did it were still terrible at identifying the warpin and didn't do anything obvious like get a spy into a public fleet.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#293 - 2016-02-09 17:47:02 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So prove it. Demonstrate how easily you can be an anti-ganker if you put the effort in and I will gladly admit defeat.
I have, RFF have shown they can reduce ganking losses down to as close to zero as you can get (less than 0.11% chance of losing to gankers).
Except all that shows, once again, is that RFF can successfully be haulers, not anti-gankers. It demonstrates that by being less likely to be chosen as a target they can survive due to the sheer number of targets flying around and the relatively low number of gankers. Should they ever be the only targets flying around, their losses would increase due to the simple fact that it's impossible to be ungankable.

How many times are you going to present those same figures? They are irrelevant figures which only prove that you are unwilling to have a reasonable dicsussion.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#294 - 2016-02-09 17:49:57 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Because only a few AG were even willing to take the small loss of a thrasher and a little sec, even on an alt, and the ones who did it were still terrible at identifying the warpin and didn't do anything obvious like get a spy into a public fleet.
Bull. I've seen people try and fail while on grid. Sometimes the looter is just faster, especially if the AG has a higher latency.

Oh wait, yeah, it's because they aren't an awesome skilled pilot like you, right? By all means demonstrate how it's done. Roll

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#295 - 2016-02-09 17:53:17 UTC
Okay you asked for it, HERE is why AG is useless: you actively drive off competent players. The few who have any inclination of helping your insane agenda or making you better players either leave because you're such a toxic and negative community or get banned from your channel and blocked by half of you because they have actual experience with highsec content creation. AG is a bunch of angry miners and ratters who don't want to learn anything about pvp, especially highsec pvp, and feel that CCP should just hand everything to them on a plate.
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#296 - 2016-02-09 17:54:32 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Okay you asked for it, HERE is why AG is useless: you actively drive off competent players. The few who have any inclination of helping your insane agenda or making you better players either leave because you're such a toxic and negative community or get banned from your channel and blocked by half of you because they have actual experience with highsec content creation. AG is a bunch of angry miners and ratters who don't want to learn anything about pvp, especially highsec pvp, and feel that CCP should just hand everything to them on a plate.

AMEN

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#297 - 2016-02-09 18:00:27 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lucas Kell wrote:


How many times are you going to present those same figures?



Every time you spout bullshit that there is nothing you can do to stop gankers. Here we have the largest freight organisation in EVE, they have stats that show they can reduce the risk of losing cargo to gankers to near zero. The problem you have starts and ends with AG and AG alone.
Aerich e'Kieron
Peace.Keepers
#298 - 2016-02-09 19:45:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Aerich e'Kieron
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Hehe, wreck popping was one of the few effective ways of interrupting work of large freighter ganker groups in hisec (primarily goons and thier code alts), so it is nice to see that CSM is working for the null block interests as per usual.

Now, I have nothing against this proposal but there is a major caveat - if you're gonna do this please fix the ability to loot other people's cargo while avoiding getting suspect flagged for it.

What I'm referring to is the fact that one can get next to a yellow wreck with a ship with fleet hanger (e.g. Deep space transport or an Orca) and a character in a noob ship, use the character in the noob ship to transfer cargo to DST and only the noob ship guy will get suspect flagged while DST will merrily warp away with stolen goods.

Please fix this so that Fleet hanger ship can't receive such (illegal) loot or can do it but gets flagged in the process (obviously, make it so that it is not prone to abuse). Do that, and I don't think many will care about EHP of the wrecks.



Might be kind of cool if stolen loot was flagged as such, kind of like illegal drugs
Perhaps make stolen loot difficult or impossible to sell on the highsec market, maybe the same customs officer scanning of ships with illegal content etc etc

I haven't thought this through at all btw, just popped into my head so I'm spending 45 seconds to blurt it out

(has a -9.9 sec status and wants to fit his ships completely with "stolen" goods)
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#299 - 2016-02-09 19:50:10 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Okay you asked for it, HERE is why AG is useless: you actively drive off competent players. The few who have any inclination of helping your insane agenda or making you better players either leave because you're such a toxic and negative community or get banned from your channel and blocked by half of you because they have actual experience with highsec content creation. AG is a bunch of angry miners and ratters who don't want to learn anything about pvp, especially highsec pvp, and feel that CCP should just hand everything to them on a plate.
I've met plenty of reasonable, well spoken and competent AGs. I supposed when you're a code member and you leap into their channel going "You guys suck!" and "oh the tears! lololololol" you don't get the best reception. Again though, I welcome you to prove it, by demonstrating how well you can AG if you do it right.

baltec1 wrote:
Every time you spout bullshit that there is nothing you can do to stop gankers. Here we have the largest freight organisation in EVE, they have stats that show they can reduce the risk of losing cargo to gankers to near zero. The problem you have starts and ends with AG and AG alone.
I didn't say there's nothing you can do to stop gankers, I said that the mechanics for players who are not the actual hauler to fight back against a gank in progress (so anti-gankers) are weak enough to pretty much guarantee their loss.

And once again, Red Frog make themselves less likely to be chosen as targets, which any hauler can do, but since there is no way to make yourself ungankable, they are only able to get their loss rates so low because of other freighter dying. Should they be the only targets available, they would lose significantly more ships. Again though that's irrelevant because thy are haulers, not anti-gankers.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#300 - 2016-02-09 19:52:44 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I've met plenty of reasonable, well spoken and competent AGs. I supposed when you're a code member and you leap into their channel going "You guys suck!" and "oh the tears! lololololol" you don't get the best reception.


Or y'know when you just try to answer questions, correct misunderstandings, teach mechanics relevant to the discussion or suggest tactics.

Quote:
Again though, I welcome you to prove it, by demonstrating how well you can AG if you do it right.


Not my war, my war's against carebears.