These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Simple Suggestions for fixing Ganking?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#21 - 2015-01-06 21:22:12 UTC
This thread again already?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#22 - 2015-01-06 21:25:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Ramcath wrote:
To clarify, again, I did not auto-pilot.
Maybe so, but you obviously weren't paying attention as evidenced by the 2 minute gap* between your freighter dying and your pod following it into oblivion. There's literally no reason to lose your pod in highsec if you're paying attention.

The guy who got your pod had time to reship after hitting your freighter with his buddies FFS.

*Assuming that ZKills timestamps are correct.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Lady Areola Fappington
#23 - 2015-01-06 21:28:38 UTC
Ramcath wrote:


I think you are wrong in one aspect, I dont' think CCP has done everything it can to prevent it. If CCP intends for players in high sec to lose their ships to fleets of gankers then yes, that is all that will happen, enough has been done. Since they instituted the 'log off safely' feature I'm assuming that they do not feel the same way about ganking as many proponents on here do.

Everyone so far has ignored the two suggestions I put forth, and simply wants to discuss the pros/cons of ganking, how stupid I am for getting blow'd up, etc. The whole point of my original post was to confirm that ganking exists, that it will continue to exist, and nothing will stop it. That doesn't mean CCP can't modify the log off feature, as well as modify aggro to make sure logging off safely is allowed by a pilot who is paying attention.

If there is a decrease in high sec ganking, guess what. Will the gankers 'rage-quit' Eve? Nope, but they may have to venture into low and null sec more often. They may have to find another means of 'earning' isk.



Log Off Safely was never meant to be used as a "weapon" to avoid active combat. It's just a tool to help prevent getting jumped when you can't respond to it. It pretty much came about because of CCP "buffing" probers to the point that a really on-the-ball prober could pin down a target in the 15 second time between logging out and ship disappearing.

It's not a "get out of jail free" card, as shown by the many, many ways an outside person can trivially cancel a safe logout.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Siegfried Cohenberg
Cohenberg's Ethical Hauling
Freighter Friends
#24 - 2015-01-06 21:34:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Siegfried Cohenberg
I thought you didnt care about being ganked yesterday
also if you want do discuss buying a spot on my no bump list please feel free to contact me in game. you don't have to haul in fear in high sec.
Paranoid Loyd
#25 - 2015-01-06 21:42:10 UTC
Ramcath wrote:
Again, I'm not arguing precautionary steps I could've taken, I accept full responsibility for losing my ship under the current rules in place. It's just funny to see all the ganking lovers attack the individuals who instead of 'raging' on the forums simply put forth ideas on how to modify how ganking is done. You afraid CCP might ruin your gaming experience? Hi-sec safety is not an opinion, it's implied by the measures of attacking a ship in high sec.
You are acknowledging there are steps you could have taken to survive, yet at the same time saying ganking is a problem. Something is only a problem if there is nothing you can do to get out of the situation.

If there where not multiple ways to mitigate the risk of what happened to you, you would have an argument, but as it stands; "highsec should be safe" and "the risk should be of equal value" are not presenting a problem as they are based off what you think the game should be.

Ganking is very carefully balanced but you wouldn't be able to see that unless you actually participated in both sides of the equation. As I have and do participate in both sides of the equation, I am of the educated opinion it is balanced.

Ganking needs to be profitable or else it will not be a thing. "The risk should be of equal value" is immediately thrown out the window keeping this in mind.

Safety is relative. High sec is safe, but it is only in relation to low sec or null sec. Learning and understanding the mechanics of any of the three areas make them even safer, ignoring the mechanics make them dangerous.

Does the saying go "Eve is a cold, dark, harsh place" or "Eve is a cold dark, harsh place everywhere but high-sec"?

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Ramcath
Boulder Shoulders Industries
#26 - 2015-01-06 21:43:56 UTC
Siegfried Cohenberg wrote:
I thought you didnt care about being ganked yesterday
also if you want do discuss buying a spot on my no bump list please feel free to contact me in game. you don't have to haul in fear in high sec.



As I told you yesterday, I don't care about the financial aspect of getting ganked. I'm not raging, or complaining about the money loss, it is what it is. I simply started a post to see what players thought about my two simple suggestions. Since no one responded to those two suggestions but instead want to discuss the lack of attention, etc., of pilots getting ganked then the thread is rather pointless at this point.

If I wanted to I could discuss the ramifications of deterring new players to Eve, but I choose not to do so since that's not the point of the thread.
Paranoid Loyd
#27 - 2015-01-06 21:45:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
New players don't fly freighters.

As for you suggestions, no one is acknowledging them because there is nothing to fix.

But I will indulge you:

1) Safe log off is not a get out of jail free card, and should not be used as such.

2) Removing aggression to the gankee would only end up getting turned into something that gankers use to their advantage.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Ramcath
Boulder Shoulders Industries
#28 - 2015-01-06 21:48:48 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Ramcath wrote:
Again, I'm not arguing precautionary steps I could've taken, I accept full responsibility for losing my ship under the current rules in place. It's just funny to see all the ganking lovers attack the individuals who instead of 'raging' on the forums simply put forth ideas on how to modify how ganking is done. You afraid CCP might ruin your gaming experience? Hi-sec safety is not an opinion, it's implied by the measures of attacking a ship in high sec.
You are acknowledging there are steps you could have taken to survive, yet at the same time saying ganking is a problem. Something is only a problem if there is nothing you can do to get out of the situation.

If there where not multiple ways to mitigate the risk of what happened to you, you would have an argument, but as it stands; "highsec should be safe" and "the risk should be of equal value" are not presenting a problem as they are based off what you think the game should be.

Ganking is very carefully balanced but you wouldn't be able to see that unless you actually participated in both sides of the equation. As I have and do participate in both sides of the equation, I am of the educated opinion it is balanced.

Ganking needs to be profitable or else it will not be a thing. "The risk should be of equal value" is immediately thrown out the window keeping this in mind.

Safety is relative. High sec is safe, but it is only in relation to low sec or null sec. Learning and understanding the mechanics of any of the three areas make them even safer, ignoring the mechanics make them dangerous.

Does the saying go "Eve is a cold, dark, harsh place" or "Eve is a cold dark, harsh place everywhere but high-sec"?


Sorry, but you are incorrect. I am entitled to a valid opinion from one aspect of the subject and do not have to 'gank' in order to be taken seriously. Implied safety is a measure of high sec, and at no point am I saying to eliminate ganking, etc. No aggro on the freighter seems a legitimate means of securing your ship in high sec, whereas in low/null it should not. It's my opinion yes, and yours is your own. Valid points from both sides are acceptable, but it seems I'm the only one who is saying so.
Ramcath
Boulder Shoulders Industries
#29 - 2015-01-06 21:49:39 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
New players don't fly freighters.



lol...wow... i didn't realize that... gotta love the ganker trolls
Paranoid Loyd
#30 - 2015-01-06 21:50:43 UTC
Ramcath wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
New players don't fly freighters.



lol...wow... i didn't realize that... gotta love the ganker trolls
Then you should not have said it.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Ramcath
Boulder Shoulders Industries
#31 - 2015-01-06 21:54:06 UTC
I'm done with the thread, so long. Was hoping to see some feedback on my suggestions, but the ganker squad is living in fear of CCP doing anything more than they have, so they come out in droves to defend ganking at all costs. Ganking is part of the game, it truly is, and as I leave the thread just remember that I'm not trying to rage against ganking, saying it should be banned or threatening to leave Eve because I'm so upset. I could care less about the loss of isk, I do just fine in game. I would just like to have seen the ganker lovers discuss my two suggestions and as to why they are a good or bad idea, rather than the same ganker loving drivel that we've all come to know and love!
Paranoid Loyd
#32 - 2015-01-06 21:54:22 UTC
Ramcath wrote:
I am entitled to a valid opinion from one aspect of the subject and do not have to 'gank' in order to be taken seriously. Implied safety is a measure of high sec, and at no point am I saying to eliminate ganking, etc. No aggro on the freighter seems a legitimate means of securing your ship in high sec, whereas in low/null it should not. It's my opinion yes, and yours is your own. Valid points from both sides are acceptable, but it seems I'm the only one who is saying so.
Of course you are entitled to an opinion, but you do have to have some experience besides that of the victim to have an objective opinion.

So while you are welcome to an opinion, coming to a definitive conclusion and presenting solutions to a perceived problem with experience from only one side of the equation is highly flawed in any situation.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#33 - 2015-01-06 21:54:25 UTC
Redundant thread is redundant is locked.


The Rules:
17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss.
If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost.
Please keep discussion regarding a topic to a single thread.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Previous page12