EVE General Discussion

You assume people understand English, Ralph. Hell, I'm native and I still don't understand half of it. :D

I've never had the pleasure of pissing into the wind..it just doesn't quite work out right for me

leson #1 of having a penis : don't **** into the wind

edit: lolswearfilter

I was referring to some possible defence fleet who is defending the structure, which is usually what you want if a fleet is attacking your stuff, and not just the guy "piloting" the structure.

They only included ganking in that study because it regularly comes up on the forums and elsewhere where people just assert out of thin air that ganking or wardecking is the main reason new players quit. Rise tried to find out why or why not people who play the trial subscribe. If the sentiment of so many players is that ganking has a big influence on that then it is obviously a good idea to try to figure out if there is some merit to that hypothesis.

Turns out there isn't and as we said for many years, if the carebears cry for more protection for new players they actually cry for more protection for themselves. New players don't have an issue with all that, since they still see EVE as a game and in games sometimes you lose stuff, that is pretty natural.

Also you seam to completely ignore the part where he mentioned that only <1% of people who quit the game in the survey they get if they unsubscribe about why they quit the game mention ship loss as a reason. That is pretty significant and this is actually for ALL players and not for < 15 days, since they are not subscribed.

So there may be a few people who quit because they are not comfortable losing ships, which in EVE online is actually something like a "consumable" in other games which is supposed to explode at one point. On the other hand there are 99% which quit out of completely different reasons and if people are concerned about people quitting that is the group they should probably focus their attention on and not the vocal crybabies who can't handle the game and project their shortcomings on everyone else.

You are basically the anti-vaxxer guy of EVE online. What possible study could they present that will change your opinion? You are obviously very biased in your views and no matter how many facts they bring to the table you will immediately call BS because it goes against your established believe.

But don't worry, I don't try to convince you, I know perfectly well you don't have the intellectual honesty to admit you where wrong. All this discussions are basically to show other people who read it the complete disconnection of the carebear population with the realities of the game and their obvious intellectual dishonesty, which you perfectly demonstrated once again.

Now I'm totally in favour of it. Seams completely air tight if you ask me, no way to abuse that. If you want to push that idea on F&I I will completely support it.

Let me point it out for you so even you can get it:

Gankers have two major imbalances that enable them to have an easy life ganking freighters, the first is bumping the infinite no consequence point, the second is no consequence loot scooping through a DST into a freighter using a noob ship to scoop. On the other side the anti-gankers had the low EHP of the wreck. That was a sort of balance, but the emergent game play was getting players to actually gank the wrecks, because that was something that players who were focused on other areas did not train and could not afford to lose a character too.

So if you look at that a kinda balance, the Anti-gankers were fail becuase they could not stop small fast ships from ganking and the gankers were fail because they could not stop a small fast anti ganker ship from ganking, perfect balance, except that you lot did not like it, so using high level contacts with CCP you nuked it.

So the question is why is the emergent gameplay of gankers protected when ganking, and why is the emergent game play of anti-gankers when ganking is not protected.

Not cryinging, just explaining the prespective of the issue. I know you want your cake and you want to stuff your face with it, seems fair to me...

Even if the wardec system needs some tweaking (which I'm open to), you're proposing major surgery for a stubbed toe. The second and third order effects of such a radical move would be staggering. Name one problem that can't be fixed by a simple adjustment to the wardec fee structure. Wardecs are cheap and easy because they're priced to be cheap and easy. You can make a rational case for the adjustment of fees - but not a complete revolution in the basic game structure.

Well I'd argue that yours is a radical solution in search of problem then. The actual articulated problems (such as that described by the OP) can be addressed through less extreme methods. Beyond that, and you're just arguing philosophy of game design.

Oh dear...

The difference here is that there are multiple counters for the tactics ganker use. You can do various things to prevent or escape bumping. You can loot the wreck before the ganker loots the wreck, bump the DST, etc, while not easy they are at least possible.

Alphaing a wreck had no counter. It is not possible to prevent a cheap thrasher to completely destroy the wreck and all loot. It will be invincible for a few seconds when landing on grid and has lock and fired before it is possible to get a lock on the thrasher for everything else.

It is obviously still possible to kill the wreck. But you have to invest more than 1mil ISK. The only thing that changed was the increase in EHP, which the gankers had to deal with multiple times and we adapted. So if you want to obliterate the loot 20+ people worked for it is just reasonable to expect you to put in some effort and investment, the same way it is expected from the gankers.

That problem was there for years and you where not the first one to use it against gankers. You make it look like you had somehow just invented that and in came CCP with the nerf bat. That's not what happened.

The real reason for the change was the nuking of capital wrecks in nullsec without effort to prevent the enemy from getting their hands on the usually very valuable modules of capital ships. The effect on ganking was a side effect same as the damage control rebalance was a side effect on the EHP of freighters. We both got a nerf and had to invest more to get the same result.

The only difference is that for you it somehow broke your back and you did not recover since while CODE. was ganking Freighters the very next day with more firepower. HTFU