These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Gank Multiboxing

Author
Ronnie Rose
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2017-03-24 01:13:06 UTC
It's getting pretty out of control when players do it with 5 plus alts. I think its abusing an aspect of EVE its designers did not originally intend as part of the play experience.

CCP should limit or restrict the practice and consider it a type of exploit when over done.

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

unidenify
Deaf Armada
#2 - 2017-03-24 02:59:04 UTC
They already nerf multi-boxer enough to where it is pretty difficult to gank with 5+ alts.
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#3 - 2017-03-24 03:05:42 UTC
Whether or not it is ganking or some other form of PvP, it is in fact actually difficult to do with any Finesse.
I personally know exactly 3 players myself that can do this, and only 1 of them is truly proficient at it.

Nope, PVP multiboxing takes skill.

-1 to this idea i say
Breg Valkar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2017-03-24 03:28:04 UTC
That's an interesting opinion. Have you tried doing the same thing in return?

Multiboxing ECM Burst frigates to disrupt a gank seems like a near-surefire (and cheaper) way to defend a target against a ganking squadron of the same size. You probably just need to put in the same amount of effort as the other side (a trivial amount, as I've read from threads here on this forum) and suffer the same consequences (less, since they're FR and your only concern is aggressing bystanders). Plus, you're AoE.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#5 - 2017-03-24 04:47:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Gank multiboxing is best solved by other means than any artificial restrictions.
Namely... give industrial vessels of all kinds real fittings and slot allowances, then increase (Yes, I do mean increase) the concord timer significantly.
(Concord should also just remote detonate your ship rather than spawn in and shoot it as the spawning in can cause significant lag en mass, which is why AoE en mass is very very bad in high sec).

The increase in timer means they can't just hit follow/f1/f2/f3 and wait till concord is done then fleet warp the pods because there is a lot longer to fight in and the targets can fight back. Yes it makes it easier to gank someone not paying attention but well, tough luck. And yes it lowers the numbers needed for a gank, but it also gives a lot more of a chance for defenders to act. And that interaction is the important thing.

Sure they still 'can' bring 20 ships and just blow you up instantly, but then it's massive overkill and far less efficient than if they do it with 2 or 4. And you get to feel smug that they were that scared of you they felt the need to overkill
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#6 - 2017-03-24 05:09:50 UTC
Solution in need of a problem. Ganking is already trivially easy to avoid, and using alt accounts has always been and will always continue to be part of the game. If you're getting ganked try not sucking at EVE instead of whining for nerfs to protect you.
Breg Valkar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#7 - 2017-03-24 05:53:58 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Gank multiboxing is best solved by other means than any artificial restrictions.
Namely... give industrial vessels of all kinds real fittings and slot allowances, then increase (Yes, I do mean increase) the concord timer significantly.
(Concord should also just remote detonate your ship rather than spawn in and shoot it as the spawning in can cause significant lag en mass, which is why AoE en mass is very very bad in high sec).

The increase in timer means they can't just hit follow/f1/f2/f3 and wait till concord is done then fleet warp the pods because there is a lot longer to fight in and the targets can fight back. Yes it makes it easier to gank someone not paying attention but well, tough luck. And yes it lowers the numbers needed for a gank, but it also gives a lot more of a chance for defenders to act. And that interaction is the important thing.

Sure they still 'can' bring 20 ships and just blow you up instantly, but then it's massive overkill and far less efficient than if they do it with 2 or 4. And you get to feel smug that they were that scared of you they felt the need to overkill



You can already actually fight back. It's called doing the same thing as they do. i.e. getting friends or alts.

I suggest that you're quite mistaken about the scale of organization attackers have to do compared to defenders. If gank defenders could organize on the same scale that gankers do (And that's not a matter of game tools, it's a matter of social cooperation) Then we would agree that there would be a lot less industrials/freighters exploding.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#8 - 2017-03-24 07:33:19 UTC
Breg Valkar wrote:

You can already actually fight back. It's called doing the same thing as they do. i.e. getting friends or alts.

I suggest that you're quite mistaken about the scale of organization attackers have to do compared to defenders. If gank defenders could organize on the same scale that gankers do (And that's not a matter of game tools, it's a matter of social cooperation) Then we would agree that there would be a lot less industrials/freighters exploding.

Bwahaha, No.
It's not a matter of scale of organisation.
You are asking the people involved to not only manage their scale of industrial operation but ALSO manage a similar scale of gank. Meaning you are expecting them to do MORE organisation. And the consequences of ganking are negligible to a ganker who has planned for them, but incredibly difficult for an anti ganker who tries to pre gank the bumpers & such since the anti ganker needs to actually be able to stay on grid, or they are too late to try and defend.
Also the game mechanics do not support defending against ganks currently, with how quickly they are over it's very hard to intervene even if you are in the area. You are comparing being on eternal watch vs picking one 15 second window to act in. The two are not equitable.

Hence my point to increase the gank timer so that the interaction is more spread out and there is time for intervention if people are willing (which means anyone actually afk or lazy still dies in a horrible fire), but to do that without it being totally silly season on industrials they need to get real fittings (which also requires them to then train skills to use said fittings and to have the knowledge to use them right as well).

Over all it should result in about the same number of ganks happening, if not more, since gankers will be able to operate in smaller groups, but the defenders will have more of a reasonable opportunity to intervene sensibly. Rather than this perfect robot type of response you seem to envision.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#9 - 2017-03-24 07:44:19 UTC
unidenify wrote:
They already nerf multi-boxer enough to where it is pretty difficult to gank with 5+ alts.


Very true. It is now against the rules to use electronic or mechanical means to control the actions in multiple eve clients simultaneously. Yes, you can have have multiple clients open and you can control each one individually, but the benefit drops dramatically whenever PvP comes into play. Also, unless you are breaking additional rules, multiple characters in game on a single computer are going to be Omega, not Alpha.

So, if you think they are breaking any rules by broadcasting orders to multiple clients, feel free to report them. Otherwise, you are dealing with multiple people or someone very skilled at Alt+Tab.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#10 - 2017-03-24 09:06:30 UTC
It works both ways.

Haulers often use multibox ALTS to scout their route or web a freighter into warp. Jump freighters require cynos and this will usually be a multibox ALT.

Other haulers play the probabilities - launching several freighters on autopilot before going to work or sleep. A bulkhead fit freighter with less than 1 billion in cargo is not a profitable gank and there are no tears to harvest so these ships have a very high probability of arriving safely at destination. You will experience an occasional loss but so what - as long as most get through and the business is profitable.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#11 - 2017-03-24 10:39:08 UTC
buthurt much holy?
Wolfino
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2017-03-24 11:17:42 UTC
They have cracked down on programs that allow multiboxing to be easy. So now that its not easy have you ever tried to pvp with 2+ characters 2 characters is ok, 3 characters your usually making mistakes on one but its slow reaction usually 4 characters one wont even really get on the killmail and 5 your not solo doing 5 accounts in pvp unless your the most elite multi-boxer.

And ccp will never force people to have x amount of characters cuz they are banking in so much money from people having alts.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#13 - 2017-03-24 11:20:41 UTC
Do Little wrote:
It works both ways.

Haulers often use multibox ALTS to scout their route or web a freighter into warp. Jump freighters require cynos and this will usually be a multibox ALT.

Other haulers play the probabilities - launching several freighters on autopilot before going to work or sleep. A bulkhead fit freighter with less than 1 billion in cargo is not a profitable gank and there are no tears to harvest so these ships have a very high probability of arriving safely at destination. You will experience an occasional loss but so what - as long as most get through and the business is profitable.


I think multiboxing for this or mining ops is not a problem.

However I do have a problem when a self-proclaimed pvper "only" needs 2+ to shoot at one boat.

You can read all those almost sad sob stories about the poor sov alliances with only 845729566415614835 members that never have content and stuff.

When I go out there and a "resonse" to 4x frigate is 3x sooper dooper, 6 carrier, 5 dreads, 8 hictors... accumulating to 190 accounts in the system you ventured to, you have to think why they don't want you there.

The "statement" is clear, "never do this again", so I don't.

So just be quiet you "poor" souls and rethink your ways.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#14 - 2017-03-24 13:46:24 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Do Little wrote:
It works both ways.

Haulers often use multibox ALTS to scout their route or web a freighter into warp. Jump freighters require cynos and this will usually be a multibox ALT.

Other haulers play the probabilities - launching several freighters on autopilot before going to work or sleep. A bulkhead fit freighter with less than 1 billion in cargo is not a profitable gank and there are no tears to harvest so these ships have a very high probability of arriving safely at destination. You will experience an occasional loss but so what - as long as most get through and the business is profitable.


I think multiboxing for this or mining ops is not a problem.

However I do have a problem when a self-proclaimed pvper "only" needs 2+ to shoot at one boat.

You can read all those almost sad sob stories about the poor sov alliances with only 845729566415614835 members that never have content and stuff.

When I go out there and a "resonse" to 4x frigate is 3x sooper dooper, 6 carrier, 5 dreads, 8 hictors... accumulating to 190 accounts in the system you ventured to, you have to think why they don't want you there.

The "statement" is clear, "never do this again", so I don't.

So just be quiet you "poor" souls and rethink your ways.


There are 2 points that push people to doing this. 1st is they don't want you in their space so the most overpowered reaction force is often the best way to make sure roamers **** off and go else where. Most people would rather PvP happen in someone else's backyard because it mean they are in PvP ship while the other guy might be in his PvE fit becoming an easy kill.

The second one is the obvious content thirst that some people suffer from and make them join in anything where a kill might happen. There is a skill to be had? You will have people burning from all direction with some even telling you to not kill the target so they can get on it.

It's like people don't understand that unless player have massive grudge against you, they won't be your content if you keep curb-stomping them...
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#15 - 2017-03-24 16:04:22 UTC
It's as intended as much as multi boxing pve or mining is.

It's no more a problem than multi boxing pve or mining.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#16 - 2017-03-24 17:33:18 UTC  |  Edited by: elitatwo
Frostys Virpio wrote:
...It's like people don't understand that unless player have massive grudge against you, they won't be your content if you keep curb-stomping them...


Your alliance buddies must hate me quite a lot then..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#17 - 2017-03-24 19:12:36 UTC
I'd remove the "Gank" in the thread title because what you're describing is not exclusive to ganking but applies to all forms of multiboxing where most or all chars do the same activity. The actual problem is that many activities require very little interactivity which makes multiboxing them possible in the first place or even bearable/interresting for many people (think mining e.g.).

So, fixing them would require them to be more interactive which in turn would cost CCP a lot of subs. It would at least be risky for CCP to do that and tbh, I think it's way too late for that.

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !

Ajem Hinken
WarFear Gaming
#18 - 2017-03-24 20:11:48 UTC
You know that you could ruin the ganker's day by using an alt to shoot a ship to trip concord so the response time was effectively 0 seconds?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6875494#post6875494 - Ship mounted explosives. Because explosions and Jita chaos.

Cade Windstalker
#19 - 2017-03-24 21:26:59 UTC
Ajem Hinken wrote:
You know that you could ruin the ganker's day by using an alt to shoot a ship to trip concord so the response time was effectively 0 seconds?


Or, you know, just use an alt in a duel to web the ship so it enters warp almost instantly, with no sec status hit, lost ship, ect...
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#20 - 2017-03-25 00:15:35 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Or, you know, just use an alt in a duel to web the ship so it enters warp almost instantly, with no sec status hit, lost ship, ect...


But that would require effort! Much better to just ban suicide ganking.
123Next page