EVE General Discussion

Let me start off by saying I have never ganked anyone in highsec, nor have I ever been successfully ganked in highsec (the highsec freighter kill on my record was suspect flag for some damn reason, didn't ask). I know nothing about the actual experience of this gameplay.

However, I do know game design and so I suggest an alternate idea.

Instead of balancing ganking vs not ganking as a 0 sum game in which "balance" is a net 0, instead look at it as a balance between the playstyle of the gankers and the playstyle of the hauler. Make ganking too easy, and hauling becomes more problematic, people do it less, prices go up, less targets for the gankers, more concentration of danger of each hauler, so on and so on, until new equilibrium is met. Make ganking harder and fewer people will go through the effort until the problem is sufficiently solved as to reduce the complexity of the new process. Haulers become "safer" and hauling becomes more common, higher numbers mean fewer percent of the total are being ganked, more risks are taken.

In this universe it actually seems to be that the best way to handle this issue is to every so often, solve the puzzle for the gankers. You don't have to incentivise ganking, the system incentivises itself, so people work to solve the new puzzle and find new methods and eventually the danger level rises until it is time to shake it up once again.

So maybe that is why you see these things. Every time the ratio of killers vs haulers raises above a certain point, they remove an exploit or otherwise terrible broken mechanic to make the wheel continue to turn.

Just a thought

People keep on saying things like this yet there is absolutely zero evidence to back it up. The number of freighters getting ganked is staggeringly tiny and there is already highly effective counters to bumping.

And the number of people dead to violent crimes with guns is less than that of cars.

We still make a big deal of it.

Its whenever somebody has their "life bubble" pierced that they then overly focus on it.
If somebody else gets shot, why it could happen to me as well! (Nevermind the majority are criminals shooting each other over territory and money )

So to do these people think they could be ganked, never mind that its something like what, 10 toons total on a really good night of them just coming constantly per gank group?

Really, the bigger issue is people flying what they can't afford to lose, case in point, somebody ran the new upwell stuff in a shuttle on day 0 and I saw them pop.

You've been telling them a long time what to do, but the end result is that they don't care and would rather face the music than change.

The reason CCP is looking at highsec a little more is because nothing induces rage anywhere close to being ganked in highsec. If anyone else blows up anywhere else, they either had a warning message pop up on their screen or the pew pew was consensual. Rage = rage quit sometimes wich = lost sub, wich = less income for CCP.

I have personally known people to unsub after dieing to an expensive highsec gank. Its actually common. I don't speak for CCP but I would think it's safe to assume these changes to highsec are mainly for monetary reasons.

Short of a forced fire safety of green in highsec completely removing all non wartarget aggression.

I don't see that happening anytime soon if ever though. I wonder what would happen lol.

I have removed a few personal attacks and off-topic replies.

This is demonstrably false. There is an entire anti-ganking community whose gameplay is entirely dependent on the existence of ganking.

Ganking directly creates the content for anti-ganking gameplay.

You can claim whatever you want about the value of that content, but claiming that ganking doesn't create content is a straight up lie. But hey carebears lying to push their agenda isn't exactly a new thing.

This has been remedied by pegging you with a rookie ship.
Then you have a 15 minute log off timer, and it can be refreshed at any time.

The three minute always goes through has another part, the server has to check each tick if a ship can warp.
This is the same as serving up a 504 error.
Its sending back a bit of data to say just get it over with, in this case the warp instead of an error.

Functionally for ganking, this doesn't change as much if you keep everyone nearby or go for alphastrikes.
The bigger issue here is if you can't tank the surprise moment or have multiple targets during a cooldown.
But then, this is now a better enforcement in a nominal sense, since it puts through that ganks have a window at each gate to occur.

So once more, fast reacting blobs do better, but then again ganking with tornadoes is always more fun.

Because the gankers in high sec are not "content creators". That phrase was invented as a smoke screen to hide their true intentions: Griefing. Before they came up with this white wash, gankers would say they did it for "The precious tears". They finally figured out that was politically incorrect, and put up the current smoke screen.

They are in fact content destroyers. The freighters they destroy can no longer haul, preventing them from creating content. The removal of the ship itself is a direct removal of content. The cargo lost to the loot fairy is a removal of content. The interaction between buyers and sellers that would have occurred if that cargo had been put on the market is also a loss of content, along with whatever content would have been created had that cargo been available to be used by other players.

Ships destroyed. Market activity gone. Useful items gone. Ganking does not create content. It destroys content.

Perhaps CCP plans on toning down highsec rewards and replacing a lot of highsec space with lowsec? Like less or equal than .7 would do the trick.

There obviously have to be rookie systems in game and in those areas of space, the mechanics have to be newbie-friendly. Not seeing the "nerf content creators to death" part tho. What content are we talking about?