These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

why does it seem like CCP is castrating high sec content creators

First post
Author
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#461 - 2016-06-21 13:58:37 UTC
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:

Highsec should be safe, because players actively keep it safe.


That would be nullsec.

But... there may be another way. By allowing Factional Warfare militia to engage anyone with -2 or lower standing towards their faction as well as -2 or lower sec status (of any faction). And there ya go: players can replace the police (Concord of course remains to keep capsuleers in check starting at -5 as per usual).

This policework could replace defensive plexing (make the farms stop pls). Then revoke docking rights for opposing factions and we might see some interesting things happening.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#462 - 2016-06-21 15:42:02 UTC
Strygaldwir Alorkym wrote:
Perhaps one of the unintended consequences of ganking is the loss of players. When I initially stumbled upon Eve, I was searching for a strategic simulation, not a Shoot-em up, who has the fastest trigger finger. Being ganked by 5 catalyst to 1 mining barge is not my idea of fun, even on the occasion where Concord gets there before I am podded.

The point being that as a content creation justification. It may be content one does not wish and so many are choosing with their feet. As in walking away!

When I want PVP, I go to Null sec, or lately to Elite Dangerous.

Pity.

As usual, no facts to support your claim, just an opinion that ganking hurts player number because that fits your personal view, so therefore must be true.

Well, CCP don't think so and they've tried to validate that view. They failed.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#463 - 2016-06-21 18:44:30 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Strygaldwir Alorkym wrote:
Perhaps one of the unintended consequences of ganking is the loss of players. When I initially stumbled upon Eve, I was searching for a strategic simulation, not a Shoot-em up, who has the fastest trigger finger. Being ganked by 5 catalyst to 1 mining barge is not my idea of fun, even on the occasion where Concord gets there before I am podded.

The point being that as a content creation justification. It may be content one does not wish and so many are choosing with their feet. As in walking away!

When I want PVP, I go to Null sec, or lately to Elite Dangerous.

Pity.

As usual, no facts to support your claim, just an opinion that ganking hurts player number because that fits your personal view, so therefore must be true.

Well, CCP don't think so and they've tried to validate that view. They failed.


As usual someone with no facts telling someone that they have no facts and then uses a survey of 15 day old toons to say that CCP think a certain way, priceless...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#464 - 2016-06-21 21:53:31 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:

As usual someone with no facts telling someone that they have no facts and then uses a survey of 15 day old toons to say that CCP think a certain way, priceless...

Except there are facts. They may not be on the order of experiments on gravity, but there are facts that show that ganking does not cause a significant loss of newbies.
The information released by CCP also doesn't show that ganking is actually good for the game of course, simply that it doesn't cost them players over other issues new players experience.

And I think it can be fairly said I'm on the other side from gankers about the current meta, but even I don't want ganking to go away, I just want it to become more fun overall for the ganked. And no, random anecdotes from someone saying 'I had fun from dying in 10 seconds' won't convince me it's a fun experience for most players.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#465 - 2016-06-21 22:02:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Strygaldwir Alorkym wrote:
Perhaps one of the unintended consequences of ganking is the loss of players. When I initially stumbled upon Eve, I was searching for a strategic simulation, not a Shoot-em up, who has the fastest trigger finger. Being ganked by 5 catalyst to 1 mining barge is not my idea of fun, even on the occasion where Concord gets there before I am podded.

The point being that as a content creation justification. It may be content one does not wish and so many are choosing with their feet. As in walking away!

When I want PVP, I go to Null sec, or lately to Elite Dangerous.

Pity.

As usual, no facts to support your claim, just an opinion that ganking hurts player number because that fits your personal view, so therefore must be true.

Well, CCP don't think so and they've tried to validate that view. They failed.


As usual someone with no facts telling someone that they have no facts and then uses a survey of 15 day old toons to say that CCP think a certain way, priceless...

CCP have posted their findings on this for the last couple of years.

Fanfest 2014 and 2015 as well as Eve Vegas 2014. Several posts in the forum too. The evidence has been discussed to death here for the last couple of years. So no, much more than one study of new players.

Facts exist, so as usual Dracvlad, you're a beacon of stupidity.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Sustrai Aditua
Intandofisa
#466 - 2016-06-21 23:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Sustrai Aditua
Bumping Mechanics ... bwaaaa haaaa haaaa haaaaa!!!

CCP "has" (not "have"): If you're going to tell someone they're stupid, do it with proper subject/verb agreement or YOU look...right, stupid. CCP is A corporation - singular, not plural. It's not more than one corporation. TYVM Have a nice day!Big smile

Bumping Mechanics ... bwaaaa haaaa haaaa haaaaa!!!

PS If you're trying to justify ganking in high sec as "content creation" maybe you should be cas...(refer to subject line.)

If we get chased by zombies, I'm tripping you.

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#467 - 2016-06-22 01:01:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Sustrai Aditua wrote:
PS If you're trying to justify ganking in high sec as "content creation" maybe you should be cas...(refer to subject line.)

I'm not trying to justify ganking in highsec as content creation. Learn to read.

As to the grammar bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY (pretty much sums it up. from 0:43 sec onwards as I don't claim to be doing something free and original in a creative way as per the opening).

But yes of course. In a pedant way you are correct that my expression was incorrect. However, your version was no more correct. Correct it would be 'CCP devs have', not 'CCP has', since the Corporation hasn't at all expressed anything. It's the developers that have expressed their views and findings.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#468 - 2016-06-22 05:17:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:

As usual someone with no facts telling someone that they have no facts and then uses a survey of 15 day old toons to say that CCP think a certain way, priceless...

Except there are facts. They may not be on the order of experiments on gravity, but there are facts that show that ganking does not cause a significant loss of newbies.
The information released by CCP also doesn't show that ganking is actually good for the game of course, simply that it doesn't cost them players over other issues new players experience.

And I think it can be fairly said I'm on the other side from gankers about the current meta, but even I don't want ganking to go away, I just want it to become more fun overall for the ganked. And no, random anecdotes from someone saying 'I had fun from dying in 10 seconds' won't convince me it's a fun experience for most players.


The fact is what you just pointed out that being ganked in the first 15 days as a newbie has no impact on their retention. But suggesting that it does not show that ganking causes them to lose players over other issues I would sugest that you don't know that and neither do I. All I can go upon is the reasons people I know or met that left the game, which is of course rather subjective.

I am quite happy that there is ganking too and I agree with you that it has to be fun for both sides, that is why bumping had to be adjusted, if you came across people like I did who had been bumped for hours and were really annoyed at CCP you would say what you just said even more. The mining ships are fine now as people have choices while before they had the choice of ships that were all easy to gank. CCP will continue to have ganking and war decs, but it needs adjustment to get the right balance, from where I am sitting it is almost there.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#469 - 2016-06-22 05:25:42 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Strygaldwir Alorkym wrote:
Perhaps one of the unintended consequences of ganking is the loss of players. When I initially stumbled upon Eve, I was searching for a strategic simulation, not a Shoot-em up, who has the fastest trigger finger. Being ganked by 5 catalyst to 1 mining barge is not my idea of fun, even on the occasion where Concord gets there before I am podded.

The point being that as a content creation justification. It may be content one does not wish and so many are choosing with their feet. As in walking away!

When I want PVP, I go to Null sec, or lately to Elite Dangerous.

Pity.

As usual, no facts to support your claim, just an opinion that ganking hurts player number because that fits your personal view, so therefore must be true.

Well, CCP don't think so and they've tried to validate that view. They failed.


As usual someone with no facts telling someone that they have no facts and then uses a survey of 15 day old toons to say that CCP think a certain way, priceless...

CCP have posted their findings on this for the last couple of years.

Fanfest 2014 and 2015 as well as Eve Vegas 2014. Several posts in the forum too. The evidence has been discussed to death here for the last couple of years. So no, much more than one study of new players.

Facts exist, so as usual Dracvlad, you're a beacon of stupidity.


Back to insults again, which is your normal operation to divert attention that you base all your assumptions on a study of 15 day old players, and discussions by who based on what data, mere pap and fluff which you accused others of doing, this is not the same as talking about mechanics like crimewatch, this is analysis of numbers where the right questions have been asked when people de-sub. It is like earlier in the thread your simplistic and pathetic +1 nerf suggestion, laughable...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#470 - 2016-06-22 06:18:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
... you base all your assumptions on a study of 15 day old players, and discussions by who based on what data, mere pap and fluff which you accused others of doing, this is not the same as talking about mechanics like crimewatch, this is analysis of numbers where the right questions have been asked when people de-sub. It is like earlier in the thread your simplistic and pathetic +1 nerf suggestion, laughable...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5504176#post5504221

I'll stick with the validated views of CCP over the personal bias that must just be right because reasons approach. At least CCP offer statements based on evidence and not just tears.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Mephiztopheleze
Laphroaig Inc.
#471 - 2016-06-22 07:04:01 UTC
i have an easy solution.

every year, the Security Status of every system in EVE reduces by 0.1.

Highsec will cease to be a problem shortly.

Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze

This is my Forum Main. My Combat Alt is sambo Inkura

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#472 - 2016-06-22 07:14:01 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
... you base all your assumptions on a study of 15 day old players, and discussions by who based on what data, mere pap and fluff which you accused others of doing, this is not the same as talking about mechanics like crimewatch, this is analysis of numbers where the right questions have been asked when people de-sub. It is like earlier in the thread your simplistic and pathetic +1 nerf suggestion, laughable...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5504176#post5504221

I'll stick with the validated views of CCP over the personal bias that must just be right because reasons approach. At least CCP offer statements based on evidence and not just tears.


NEW PLAYERS let me repeat it so you get it NEW PLAYERS and the data was on 15 day old max in their trial period. The only tears I have is from laughing at you trying too hard...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#473 - 2016-06-22 07:14:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Mephiztopheleze wrote:
i have an easy solution.

every year, the Security Status of every system in EVE reduces by 0.1.

Highsec will cease to be a problem shortly.

Except that highsec is just a valid area to play as any, and provides an environment that many players prefer. Highsec should be just as viable an area to play as lowsec or nullsec. None of the 4 types of space are greater than any of the others and they all deserve their unique aspects.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#474 - 2016-06-22 08:35:36 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:

Except that highsec is just a valid area to play as any, and provides an environment that many players prefer. Highsec should be just as viable an area to play as lowsec or nullsec. None of the 4 types of space are greater than any of the others and they all deserve their unique aspects.

The problem is the griefing. What CODE does isn't nice but okay. But making a living on robbing other players should, IMHO, not be a vial option in High. These guys are especially targeting new and unexperienced player to rob them. And thats not good for the game. Within the first 15 day you don't have a great load carry to Jita but when you carry your collected stuff from last month grinding and it goes "Poof" to make some 10 year player even richer that's another matter. These people are collecting exactly from these people that can't afford to loose their stuff. If I loose 200M ISK cargo + ship it's just an, severe, annoyance for me. 3 Month ago it would have been a much more severe loss.
You are effectively loosing gametime because in every other game you may loose items but your SP are save, which you collected through grinding. In Eve you loose everything you earned through grinding cause you would have gotten the SP anyway. So effectively you lost all the game time.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#475 - 2016-06-22 08:38:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Geronimo McVain wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:

Except that highsec is just a valid area to play as any, and provides an environment that many players prefer. Highsec should be just as viable an area to play as lowsec or nullsec. None of the 4 types of space are greater than any of the others and they all deserve their unique aspects.

The problem is the griefing. What CODE does isn't nice but okay. But making a living on robbing other players should, IMHO, not be a vial option in High. These guys are especially targeting new and unexperienced player to rob them. And thats not good for the game. Within the first 15 day you don't have a great load carry to Jita but when you carry your collected stuff from last month grinding and it goes "Poof" to make some 10 year player even richer that's another matter. These people are collecting exactly from these people that can't afford to loose their stuff. If I loose 200M ISK cargo + ship it's just an, severe, annoyance for me. 3 Month ago it would have been a much more severe loss.
You are effectively loosing gametime because in every other game you may loose items but your SP are save, which you collected through grinding. In Eve you loose everything you earned through grinding cause you would have gotten the SP anyway. So effectively you lost all the game time.

Griefing is not allowed in Eve. CCP has a specific policy on it (https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/203209712-Rookie-Griefing), supported by a policy on harassment and offensive behavior (https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/203209732-Harassment-and-offensive-behavior).

If anyone is griefing then report them.

Aside from that, put your evidence forward that this is a problem. If people are losing what they can't afford (in game), more fool them. They should have been more careful.

Losing game time? Rubbish. If a database entry in the UK is changed and some textures disintegrate on screen, no game time was lost. Everything used was still used and all future available time still exists.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#476 - 2016-06-22 09:13:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Geronimo McVain wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:

Except that highsec is just a valid area to play as any, and provides an environment that many players prefer. Highsec should be just as viable an area to play as lowsec or nullsec. None of the 4 types of space are greater than any of the others and they all deserve their unique aspects.

The problem is the griefing. What CODE does isn't nice but okay. But making a living on robbing other players should, IMHO, not be a vial option in High. These guys are especially targeting new and unexperienced player to rob them. And thats not good for the game. Within the first 15 day you don't have a great load carry to Jita but when you carry your collected stuff from last month grinding and it goes "Poof" to make some 10 year player even richer that's another matter. These people are collecting exactly from these people that can't afford to loose their stuff. If I loose 200M ISK cargo + ship it's just an, severe, annoyance for me. 3 Month ago it would have been a much more severe loss.
You are effectively loosing gametime because in every other game you may loose items but your SP are save, which you collected through grinding. In Eve you loose everything you earned through grinding cause you would have gotten the SP anyway. So effectively you lost all the game time.

Griefing is not allowed in Eve. CCP has a specific policy on it (https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/203209712-Rookie-Griefing).

If anyone is griefing then report them.

Aside from that, put your evidence forward that this is a problem. If people are losing what they can't afford (in game), more fool them. They should have been more careful.

Losing game time? Rubbish. If a database entry in the UK is changed and some textures disintegrate on screen, no game time was lost. Everything used was still used and all future available time still exists.


What CODE is doing on the face of it is fine which is to try and dominate hisec and force those in hisec to act as they want them to act, behind that I am not so sure in terms of targeting of newer players or all that winding up that ends up on minerbumping, but I at least find opposing and shooting CODE fun.

I stood up and complained about the fact that all mining ships had the tank of a wet paper bag, once CCP realised that they had mucked up big and lost a lot of people, they did something and gave people choices, which is great. For me the mining ships are balanced because players have options. Now the only thing you see is gankers like baltec1 crying that their tanks are too tough.

I totally agree with people ganking to make ISK and while I can feel sorry for their victims losing all that work and also understand the issue of them seeing all their progress disappear and they go backwards in terms of development, one still has to question their attitude, there is truth in what gankers say in terms of complacency. Just earlier Aaaarrggg killed a Iteron Mark IV with no modules fitted with 864m worth of capital modules in it. Those players get richer because they know how to play very well and they farm players who do not have a clue and do stupid things.

Ganking for profit is fine, people need to take more care and play to be hard to kill, if they do not then they will be killed and lose stuff, just like that Iteron IV pilot did.

Geronimo McVain, I understand what you are saying but the prime importance in this game is to look after yourself, CCP has a duty to give players choices, which they had previously failed to do with mining ships, but sorted late in the day. Bumping is another one where CCP left it and then allowed hyperdunking that created a huge wave of loss, then they realised that it was too damaging and acted, again late in the day.

I came across a lot of people who used to play as miners in Eve when I joined an organisation in SC and 7 out of 8 said that they had left because ganking was out of control and they felt let down by CCP, all of them had stopped playing in the period when all mining ships had the tank of a wet paper bag. There was nothing they could do in game to be able to protect themselves and they left the game, CCP's error and it cost them. I know that the gankers wil say oh you are basing this on some people you met, blah blah blah, but evidence number 1 is that CCP gave choices on mining ships.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#477 - 2016-06-22 19:38:18 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
... you base all your assumptions on a study of 15 day old players, and discussions by who based on what data, mere pap and fluff which you accused others of doing, this is not the same as talking about mechanics like crimewatch, this is analysis of numbers where the right questions have been asked when people de-sub. It is like earlier in the thread your simplistic and pathetic +1 nerf suggestion, laughable...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5504176#post5504221

I'll stick with the validated views of CCP over the personal bias that must just be right because reasons approach. At least CCP offer statements based on evidence and not just tears.


NEW PLAYERS let me repeat it so you get it NEW PLAYERS and the data was on 15 day old max in their trial period. The only tears I have is from laughing at you trying too hard...

Not the only statements, nor only evidence. In your denseness you can assume just one piece of evidence put forward by CCP, but that isn't the case.

Additionally, you can assume stupidly (it would be typical) that people's core views and attitudes somehow do an about turn after they e been playing the game for a while, but then this forum along would show that's not the case.

So while you an ignore or diminish the attempts by CCP to better understand the attitudes of players because they inconveniently don't fit your world view, the rest of us will acknowledge that just like CCP indicated at Fanfest 2014, invalidated opinions don't mean much when you actually find the data is opposite.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#478 - 2016-06-22 19:50:06 UTC
IMHO isn't the killing but the profit the real problem. Dotlan declared Jita the most violent System/24h. Within 24h the most violent non-High System would be on 6.
Many People are trying to make a living out of robbery and to do this you need extensive knowledge of the mechanics. Killing in Eve should be for the fun of it not to make a profit.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#479 - 2016-06-22 20:08:31 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
... you base all your assumptions on a study of 15 day old players, and discussions by who based on what data, mere pap and fluff which you accused others of doing, this is not the same as talking about mechanics like crimewatch, this is analysis of numbers where the right questions have been asked when people de-sub. It is like earlier in the thread your simplistic and pathetic +1 nerf suggestion, laughable...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5504176#post5504221

I'll stick with the validated views of CCP over the personal bias that must just be right because reasons approach. At least CCP offer statements based on evidence and not just tears.


NEW PLAYERS let me repeat it so you get it NEW PLAYERS and the data was on 15 day old max in their trial period. The only tears I have is from laughing at you trying too hard...

Not the only statements, nor only evidence. In your denseness you can assume just one piece of evidence put forward by CCP, but that isn't the case.

Additionally, you can assume stupidly (it would be typical) that people's core views and attitudes somehow do an about turn after they e been playing the game for a while, but then this forum along would show that's not the case.

So while you an ignore or diminish the attempts by CCP to better understand the attitudes of players because they inconveniently don't fit your world view, the rest of us will acknowledge that just like CCP indicated at Fanfest 2014, invalidated opinions don't mean much when you actually find the data is opposite.


All they did was an analysis on the affect of ganking on players who were in the 15 day trial period. That is it, period, a small sample that is totally irrelevant in terms of the subbed account base, all you can say is the impact of ganking on players within their 15 day trial period. This is a small data sample on a very specific question and because the right questions are not asked when people de-sub, it can only be extrapolated, which is why CCP Rise said it does not appear to affect them. Oh they were not upset at losing a venture which was given to them well who would have thought that? Roll of drums and all that... This is not the answer you are not looking for Shae, or whatever...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#480 - 2016-06-22 20:30:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Geronimo McVain wrote:
IMHO isn't the killing but the profit the real problem. Dotlan declared Jita the most violent System/24h. Within 24h the most violent non-High System would be on 6.
Many People are trying to make a living out of robbery and to do this you need extensive knowledge of the mechanics. Killing in Eve should be for the fun of it not to make a profit.


Its a game, some people do it because they can, some people don't do it even if they could, because they play a different way. I understand that you do not like people robbing others but just shoot them in the face or make it hard for them in game And if CCP make it too easy for them and don't give you any tools to make it hard for them then yell at CCP.

I am perfectly fine with people ganking for profit from other players, its a competitive game against other players. The only thing I get a bit short with is some of the over the top attempts to get undder the skin of people to make the rage and then show that to make them feel oh so superior, that leaves a dirty taste in my mouth. I have chosen to play the good guy or should I say that I have chosen to be what I see is a good guy, because one it is harder in this game and two because I prefer to play that way.

What I like about this game is that it is damn hard and mostly played against aggressive nutters holding all the cards, which means its a challenge...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp