Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Never one to stir the pot, nor upset CODE (much).

Well done CCP in addressing the Ganker imbalance.

Fleecing carebears in hisec by Gankers is a profit driven enterprise. (If gankers raise the straw-man issue of AFK mining/hauling, allow these ships to fit more effective tgt breakers for AK pilots.)


Now we need a profit driven reason to Anti-Gank. LP's simular to FW is a good start.






I would like to hear other market/profit driven incentives to A-G, even from gankers, its all about the content creation. yes.

If you gave me the powers of facpol GAME-ON.

Well you'd think that anti-gankers would charge a fee for a freighter save, and anyone that doesn't pay doesn't get saved again (or possibly gets marked on a list to be ganked by A-G).

But that would require the A-G folks to be rational. The rational ones generally end up changing sides because the A-G community is so toxic at present.

Most organized ganking groups (MiniLuv, CODE., Russians) gank for fun, not profit. MiniLuv operates purely as an ouroboros: we gank to generate revenue for MiniLuv so we can continue ganking. The most anyone is getting out of MiniLuv's profits are monthly PLEX to keep their accounts active. And these people get PLEX because they devote so much of their time to our organization that there is literally no time to go make money.




Before you get to that part, there needs to be thoughtful and engaging gameplay between gankers and anti-gankers. At the moment, anti-gankers are a thorn in our side simply because we have the choice of ganking them or ganking freighters. This is in part due to their unlimited rules of engagement against ours, but our restriction of only shooting active aggressors. The added component of Factional Police means that, aside from ganking them, there cannot be any interesting interplay between ganking and anti-ganking because we always die, regardless of whether we kill the anti-gankers or not.

I am all for making ganking more interesting via adding incentives to people to engage in both sides of the gameplay, but as I discussed with several people in #TweetFleet, that can't happen until the Anti-Ganker->Ganker->Freighter asymmetrical gameplay becomes a little more symmetrical, which may or may result in good and engaging gameplay.

Also, I'm poised to say that smart anti-gankers make tons of money from stealing our freighter wrecks and stealing our gank ship wrecks. Otherwise, there wouldn't be career wreck thieves and career salvagers and career loot scoopers.

Ah, the "civilized society" angle.

There are no civilized societies in New Eden.

But your spiteful little rant was pretty funny. Just goes to show that it's the carebears who can't manage to separate their feelings from reality, like I've always said.

Highsec seams to be a special place indeed if you are balancing game mechanics or ship stats around what a couple of players do to limit their impact. I always thought that EVE is a full sandbox, where you can set your own goals.

Now here we are, trying to change Highsec with force projection in a part of space with game mechanics entirely stacked against such things. Still we seam to move some things: Autopiloting pods/shuttles is down, the miners start to tank their ships, corporations around freighting stuff start to earn more since there is now actually risk in moving stuff around and there is a group of players forming which start to rebel against us.

But there is more to come, as we grow we can put more pressure on the Highsec dwellers and in some parts they already submit to our rule. In some other parts resistance forms. No matter what happens, it is in fact a gazillion times more interesting than the otherwise dead Highsec systems.

Now I think that a true multiplayer sandbox like EVE is advertised should allow for such a thing. No one can predict what will happen next. Maybe we continue to grow and Highsec will one day be united and be ruled by our Supreme Protector James 315. Maybe people get fed up so much that the long promised big miner coalition forms and starts to kill us off. Maybe something completely different no one expected will happen because this is a player driven sandbox and thousands of players contribute to the outcome.

In comes CCP with the nerf bat and resets part of the progress with another buff to haulers and mining ships. Not only do you nerf ganking once again, you practically tell us that you view this as some kind of elk farm and you will always step in and reverse our progress by handing out buffs to the opposition.

In other words the interesting stuff I talked about previously? It will never ever happen, because you seam to think that Highsec is not part of this dynamic player influenced sandbox, it is in fact an elk farm with CCP supervision.

If you look to nullsec, are you "balancing" things between player business out there as well? As you watch alliance A stumble because alliance B is invading and wrecking all their stuff, will you buff the doctrine ships of alliance A to maintain the "balance". Or is null not an elk farm like Highsec?

I could understand it if you actually wanted to change game mechanics around ganking with the intention to make the gameplay more interesting on both sides. But you do no such thing, you just rise the EHP like this is something in need of a hull rebalance and not in need of a change. It is incredibly lazy and the only thing it changes is that it makes ganking once again less accessible.

What in James name scares you so much about change in Highsec? It's not like we destroy the economy anytime soon, in fact the economy will always adapt and maybe it will be more interesting than before. It just seams like CCP is not ready for some really big changes.

As far as I remember before when freighters got changes with the low slots there was discussion regarding DCU being passive and if freighters can benefit from it but they had 3 options to do so:

1- Make DCU passive as he promised and reduce its PWG/CPU requirements so it can be fitted in freighters. Problem with this option it is putting some fits of frigs and destroyers out of whack which create imbalances.

2- Increase the PWG/CPU of freighters to fit DCU with couple of other modules also. Problem with this option it opens a lot of varieties to freighters to fit active hardeners since they are going to buff its CPU for that matter, You are create super tanky ungankable freighters that can OH their modules. They can't go to this road unless they are revisiting every low slot module so it can't be used by freighters.

3- Making DCU passive and nerfing it for the stated reasons in OP and to compensate that, they are giving plain HP buff to all ships in game but since freighters were originally promised to be able to fit DCU they won't be excluded from that buff.

If I'm able to dig in forums to find that old statement I'll link it.

Oh, you've said a lot over the course of this thread, alas, the substance is lacking. Randomly calling players liars or hypocrites, aggressively attacking their "blatantly dishonest rethoric" (snort) for no other reason than that they don't share your views just goes to show how little you care for civilized discourse. But just keep talking, statistically there is a chance you might say something worthwhile, one of these days.

As an afterthought: it does not matter much if the source of joy or frustration is a game or real life, feelings are always "real" for the person experiencing them. I am assuming that most of us are playing EVE to have a good time (no disrespect to masochists intended).

I don't think that even the miners shed quite as many buckets of tears as the hs gankers in this thread. Come to low sec and below, you'll have a lot more fun than shooting at fish in a barrel in high sec.

Are you suggesting that right now, pre-change, you are able to solo gank a freighter?

After the change you will have a 33% hull resist buff. You will then be able to decide if you want to continue to use a DC, giving you more resists than prior to the change in some cases, or improve another aspect of your ship without losing that 33%.

lol.

If everyone else simply ignored every beneficial change and grouped our playstyle with all other mildly similar playstyles like "high sec pirates" do, then most playstyles would have been heavily nerfed.