EVE General Discussion

I'm sorry bro but you're sounding like those anti ganker types who "don't mind ganking but think it should not be as easy to do". You and I both know that when they say that they are really saying "ganking should go away and I should be left alone". Don't be one of them bro.

The difficulty or lack thereof of what someone else is doing is none of your business or mine, your business and mine is not falling for the trap, and/or using the tools we as players already have to retaliate is appropriately brutal fashion if we do fall for the trap.

in a game like EVE it sure as hell should be, as is blowing up the house of the guy that sued you.

People like you mean well, but you think CCP can game mechanics away human nature.

Let me tell you what's gonna happen if/when CCP 'fixes' the situation to your satisfaction. The scammer types that you think are being nerfed are going to find another way to screw you and everyone else over, and CCP is going to have to try to fix that too.

Look at the histroy of this game. EVERY time CCP tries to do what people are asking for in this thread (ie 'fix' a game mechancis to 'make it better'), it got worse.

The buffed exhumers, more miners died. The added anchor rigs, more people got bumped. They added that awoxxing switch, awoxxers got craftier. They added safety pop ups and mission guides and people STILL can't figure out how to do things. They made gameplay and the UI more 'user friendly' and people are complaining more loudly than ever.


It...does....not...work.... It being the idea that you can fix your way our of people being lazy and stupid enough to fall for something they shouldn't. Sure it sucks to be locked out of a citadel after you have accepted a courier contract (I guess, I wouldn't know, I avoid high sec where this kind of bullshit and the bullshit complaints always come from), but that just means you were stupid for not planting a "security alt" *ie use one of the other 3 slots you get on your account to have a one day old alt with contracting 1 just in case of shenanigans) there before accepting.




People already have all the tools they need to not get got. CCP changing things around isn't going to help you, and if history is the judge, CCP tinkering with the system too much will just lead to even more frustration.

What you are saying has a name. It's called "that other guy has it too easy" syndrome. It's when people focus on the perceived lack of effort another person has when doing something the 1st person already dislikes.

It's a lie, it's basically you saying "this would be ok if it were harder for that other guy to do". And that isn't true, even if it took monumental effort and years of time you STILL would not like the outcome of the action the person is taking.

As I said in my previous post, the most common form of this on this forum is when people who hate ganking say "ganking is ok but it should be harder". They are lying (to themselves if no one else), gankers could be sacrificing Super-Carriers with every gank of a t1 hauler and the people who hate ganking would still find a way hate ganking (while calling for nerfs to the ganking ability of Suicide Super-Carriers).

And like I said there SHOULD be a balance.

Do you think it would be fine if I could gank a freighter in an Ibis?

People like you pretend oversights and balance issues do not exist ever. Everything is fine and nothing should ever change.

CCP should look at this themselves and determine if these mechanics are in line with the role they intend for citadels.

Why do people like you always fall back on the "you don't like change" thing?

No one said anything about never changing anything. But they WHY is important. No one in this thread has given a single good reason why CCP intervention is necessary over simply asking people to use the tools they already have.

It's a mistake to call for modifications to something when you yourself could fix your problem with a tiny bit of fore thought, because this causes other problems down the line. Scroll up a bit and you will see that even Salvos Rhoska understands this (no offense Salvos lol).

People get emotional when they think something is unfair and should be changed, but what I honestly think happens in these cases is that you dislike it so much you don't recognize the risk that it could get worse if CCP tinkers with it. there are Soooo many examples of this, like Dominion Sov where people were predicting that the changes would make things harder for people like goons when in fact it enabled Goon Dominion over much of null.

CCP intervention is just not the way to go most of the time.

You can't put an alt from another account (or the same account if you only have one) in the citadel you are doing business with as a precaution? What mechanic prevents this? What prevents an alt from docking with the delivery unless the citadel owner closes the citadel to all traffic.

And what stops you from blowing it up or paying someone to?

And that's the whole point, the people complaining about game mechanics haven't used ANY of the available already existing tools to alleviate their problem. No, it's straight to the forum and "CCPLEASE halp".CCP does always eventually try to 'fix' these things. They will try here to, and it will probably fail while making life more difficult for everyone else in the process.


How many times does this have to happen before the people here learn that it's best to figure it out for yourself than run to CCP?

How does one check ahead that that a station, 30 jumps out, is going to lock them out or not, I want to know that one? I never heard of a way to check ahead.

That's perfectly fine.

No it's not, because those unintended consequences affect everyone, not just the people advocating for game mechanics changes because they can't use the tools they already have.

This is the point of my opposition to people begging CCP for ever more 'game mechanics tweeks' or whatever they want to call them. It's just people being too lazy in a video game to figure things out for themselves, and then CCP responds to this laziness with game mechanics changes that intended to do good things but failed while introducing more bugs, exploits and generally bad crap.

Again I ask, how many times does that have to happen before people learn?