These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

An open letter to CCP.

First post
Author
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#341 - 2015-06-24 08:20:52 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
If red frog can haul your cargo so cheaply and easily that does show that ganking isn't as big an issue as you think it is.

Yes, and of course it's entirely unthinkable that a large corporation like Red Frog may have a free pass with many of the high-sec ganking groups (or at least some of the larger ones). One could also argue that a larger corporation like Red Frog can absorb considerably more losses at the hands of gankers. Then we're back to the root issue of why thousand-player corporations are able to prey indiscriminately in high-sec. Because it's lucrative, and there's effectively no recourse.

http://i.imgur.com/wvOW8jF.webm
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#342 - 2015-06-24 08:31:34 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Wait a second... usually it's the anti-gankers who cry about how ganking has absolutely no consequences. Looks like that was a lie too. I hope at least the part about the free spaceships was true, this looks more and more like a self constructed problem...

If you were trying to post constructively and discuss a problem, one might try to discuss it with you, but you're not, so... Shame you can't block your alliance on forums as well since I've yet to see a coherent and reasonable post from you lot.

But there is no problem.

All the tears from anti-ganking come from the fact that you are seriously bad at EVE and rather had some rules changed by CCP in your favour instead of coming up with a good strategy on your own. Since you already have the deck fully stacked in favour of you (invincible, 100% effective police assistance and such) I don't see how CCP can further help you without damaging the whole game in the process.

Maybe it is time to stop this childish rebellion, admit that you where wrong and let us help you become a compliant and productive citizen of Highsec.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#343 - 2015-06-24 08:37:33 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
If I so wished, I could sit in Uedama and pick off Catalysts, pre gank, all day without Concord batting an eyelid or gaining any sort of criminal flag. You'd be wise to learn how game mechanics work before making stupid assumptions and comments.

Please do that and tell me how it contributes in stopping ganks. to paraphrase yourself - you'd be wise to know what you're talking about before making stupid assumptions and comments.

shag all if only you do it but guess what happens when you take 5 or 6 falcons down there for the day?

they put effort in to achieve their goals, you should be prepared to put as much in at the very least to have a shot at stopping them.

in short , get better


Well you should get better too. You haven't really read all of my reply (about adaptibility) so let me explain. First of all gankers fit a single ECCM regularly. Let's say they bring a single ECCM cata fit. Overheated and with all skills to V its sensor strength is 29.7. A falcon with meta4/T2 racial jammer and full fit for jams (no buffer, no dc, all ecm rigs) gets 16.76 jam strength. Single jammer has a 56,41% chance of jamming that cata. Usually, you'll have to fit a sebo due to falcon's bad scanres, maybe even 2 so you'll have 4 or 5 jammers. Best case scenario, a recon - highly specialised ship could take out 4 catas after they've already landed 2 volleys each (due to server lag and locking times). Worst case it could take out none. If you bring 5 falcons, chances would be higher but again, experience shows that the gank would be repeated and eventually successful unless you have significant reps on top of those falcons. Furthermore, if you actually brought 5 falcons, they would adapt, probably fitting two eccm's to catas in which case chance of jam with a single module drops to 27% and 4 jammers still have 30% chance of failing (on a single cata). So lel at falcon idea.

Again, the real problem is the ability of bumpers to lock down target nearly indefinitely. Once you see a ship being bumped for hours (literally), and without any legal way of helping him to get out of that situation (ganking bumper is not a legal way btw) you understand that this really is a problem. However all the folks with vested interests will just troll and flood the topic/forums with their negativity instead of trying to take a step back and look at this topic without prejudice.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#344 - 2015-06-24 08:45:22 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:

Since you already have the deck fully stacked in favour of you (invincible, 100% effective police assistance and such) I don't see how CCP can further help you without damaging the whole game in the process.


I could say that the game is stacked in favour of criminals (insta undocks, ability of -10's to reside in high-sec, concord response timers, 'prepping' the systems, game geography providing clear chokepoint, etc.) but I'm not saying that since I'm trying to post constructively, unlike you. Enjoy your trolling/spamming.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#345 - 2015-06-24 08:48:42 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Well you should get better too. You haven't really read all of my reply (about adaptibility) so let me explain. First of all gankers fit a single ECCM regularly. Let's say they bring a single ECCM cata fit. Overheated and with all skills to V its sensor strength is 29.7. A falcon with meta4/T2 racial jammer and full fit for jams (no buffer, no dc, all ecm rigs) gets 16.76 jam strength. Single jammer has a 56,41% chance of jamming that cata. Usually, you'll have to fit a sebo due to falcon's bad scanres, maybe even 2 so you'll have 4 or 5 jammers. Best case scenario, a recon - highly specialised ship could take out 4 catas after they've already landed 2 volleys each (due to server lag and locking times). Worst case it could take out none. If you bring 5 falcons, chances would be higher but again, experience shows that the gank would be repeated and eventually successful unless you have significant reps on top of those falcons. Furthermore, if you actually brought 5 falcons, they would adapt, probably fitting two eccm's to catas in which case chance of jam with a single module drops to 27% and 4 jammers still have 30% chance of failing (on a single cata). So lel at falcon idea.

Sounds to me like you can prevent a gank indefinitely with only a fraction of the people the gankers need. Sounds pretty unbalanced to me.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Again, the real problem is the ability of bumpers to lock down target nearly indefinitely. Once you see a ship being bumped for hours (literally), and without any legal way of helping him to get out of that situation (ganking bumper is not a legal way btw) you understand that this really is a problem. However all the folks with vested interests will just troll and flood the topic/forums with their negativity instead of trying to take a step back and look at this topic without prejudice.

But ganking is easy as hell, you only need some F1 monkeys and there are absolutely no consequences. Aaaaand the best thing about ganking is, and I have heard that from several of you guys now, that the ships you use for the gank are free!! So I don't really see a problem here unless you are to bad to smash F1.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#346 - 2015-06-24 08:51:23 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:

Since you already have the deck fully stacked in favour of you (invincible, 100% effective police assistance and such) I don't see how CCP can further help you without damaging the whole game in the process.


I could say that the game is stacked in favour of criminals (insta undocks, ability of -10's to reside in high-sec, concord response timers, 'prepping' the systems, game geography providing clear chokepoint, etc.) but I'm not saying that since I'm trying to post constructively, unlike you. Enjoy your trolling/spamming.

You could say that, but it would make you sound really silly.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#347 - 2015-06-24 08:52:59 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
If I so wished, I could sit in Uedama and pick off Catalysts, pre gank, all day without Concord batting an eyelid or gaining any sort of criminal flag. You'd be wise to learn how game mechanics work before making stupid assumptions and comments.

Please do that and tell me how it contributes in stopping ganks. to paraphrase yourself - you'd be wise to know what you're talking about before making stupid assumptions and comments.

shag all if only you do it but guess what happens when you take 5 or 6 falcons down there for the day?

they put effort in to achieve their goals, you should be prepared to put as much in at the very least to have a shot at stopping them.

in short , get better


Well you should get better too. You haven't really read all of my reply (about adaptibility) so let me explain. First of all gankers fit a single ECCM regularly. Let's say they bring a single ECCM cata fit. Overheated and with all skills to V its sensor strength is 29.7. A falcon with meta4/T2 racial jammer and full fit for jams (no buffer, no dc, all ecm rigs) gets 16.76 jam strength. Single jammer has a 56,41% chance of jamming that cata. Usually, you'll have to fit a sebo due to falcon's bad scanres, maybe even 2 so you'll have 4 or 5 jammers. Best case scenario, a recon - highly specialised ship could take out 4 catas after they've already landed 2 volleys each (due to server lag and locking times). Worst case it could take out none. If you bring 5 falcons, chances would be higher but again, experience shows that the gank would be repeated and eventually successful unless you have significant reps on top of those falcons. Furthermore, if you actually brought 5 falcons, they would adapt, probably fitting two eccm's to catas in which case chance of jam with a single module drops to 27% and 4 jammers still have 30% chance of failing (on a single cata). So lel at falcon idea.

If i gave an excuse like that to my execs id be booted out of the alliance for being a lazy fool.
so "LeL" (or whatever you kids are saying these days) all you like but the tools are there for you.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:

Again, the real problem is the ability of bumpers to lock down target nearly indefinitely. Once you see a ship being bumped for hours (literally), and without any legal way of helping him to get out of that situation (ganking bumper is not a legal way btw) you understand that this really is a problem. However all the folks with vested interests will just troll and flood the topic/forums with their negativity instead of trying to take a step back and look at this topic without prejudice.


ganking bumper is the most hilariously effective thing to do, its yer own fault ye cant fight them with their own means.

by the way im not a ganker and i have absolutely no vested interest in them,
infact we have a smidgen over 200 kills on them.

they are fun to screw with more than anything and its your own fault ye cant do so effectively because of some imagined code(lol) of e honour.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#348 - 2015-06-24 09:09:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
If i gave an excuse like that to my execs id be booted out of the alliance for being a lazy fool.
so "LeL" (or whatever you kids are saying these days) all you like but the tools are there for you.

Wish you pointed out what exactly was lazy in numbers I provided. The fact that a single falcon can be countered completely by a single catalyst or...?

Quote:
ganking bumper is the most hilariously effective thing to do, its yer own fault ye cant fight them with their own means.

I'm sorry, but if ganking bumpers is the only way out then there is something wrong in the game mechanics. What do you do if you are bumped by two tanked machariels. Or three? Gank them all. Sure Roll.

Quote:
by the way im not a ganker and i have absolutely no vested interest in them,
infact we have a smidgen over 200 kills on them.
they are fun to screw with more than anything and its your own fault ye cant do so effectively because of some imagined code(lol) of e honour.


You presume too much - it's not about code of e-honour, its about playstyles.
Having a kill right held by someone who understands how they work can limit your high-sec activity immensely, especially if your sole focus is not pvp. A guy running missions or incursions could never undock (relatively) safely knowing that anyone he encounters could be traded his killright at any moment and activate it. Furthermore it limits your anti-ganking abilities - you gank a bumper and then you can't undock your Mach to attempt conter-bumps since you'll lose it to that killright (very likely). Now why would one lose his ship for helping prevent a high-sec crime? Where's the logic in that. There is none. Ye, I know, HTFU and stuff.

Also, let's get it straight - I'm not against ganks per se, I'm against mechanics prone to abuse and against folks acting like absolute jerks towards other folks while hiding behind 'it's just a game' argument. The fact that it's just a game does not mean you can treat others like trash (like you wouldn't in a soccer or any other real life person-to-person contact based game for example).
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#349 - 2015-06-24 09:35:02 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

[quote]ganking bumper is the most hilariously effective thing to do, its yer own fault ye cant fight them with their own means.

I'm sorry, but if ganking bumpers is the only way out then there is something wrong in the game mechanics. What do you do if you are bumped by two tanked machariels. Or three? Gank them all. Sure Roll.


Either English isn't your first language or you're just bad at reading comprehension - he's saying bump the gankers.

I once had a target bump-tackled and, with the best of intentions, made a complete fool of myself in front of none less than the Saviour of highsec (praise Him!). How? By giving the target a gentle love-tap as the gank fleet landed, intending to make sure they couldn't get to warp. Catalysts have an effective range of about 3 centimeters, so nullifying them with a bump (or bumping their target away from them) is easy as pie and comes with no Concord aggression).

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#350 - 2015-06-24 09:44:05 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
If i gave an excuse like that to my execs id be booted out of the alliance for being a lazy fool.
so "LeL" (or whatever you kids are saying these days) all you like but the tools are there for you.

Wish you pointed out what exactly was lazy in numbers I provided. The fact that a single falcon can be countered completely by a single catalyst or...?

Quote:
ganking bumper is the most hilariously effective thing to do, its yer own fault ye cant fight them with their own means.

I'm sorry, but if ganking bumpers is the only way out then there is something wrong in the game mechanics. What do you do if you are bumped by two tanked machariels. Or three? Gank them all. Sure Roll.

Quote:
by the way im not a ganker and i have absolutely no vested interest in them,
infact we have a smidgen over 200 kills on them.
they are fun to screw with more than anything and its your own fault ye cant do so effectively because of some imagined code(lol) of e honour.


You presume too much - it's not about code of e-honour, its about playstyles.
Having a kill right held by someone who understands how they work can limit your high-sec activity immensely, especially if your sole focus is not pvp. A guy running missions or incursions could never undock (relatively) safely knowing that anyone he encounters could be traded his killright at any moment and activate it. Furthermore it limits your anti-ganking abilities - you gank a bumper and then you can't undock your Mach to attempt conter-bumps since you'll lose it to that killright (very likely). Now why would one lose his ship for helping prevent a high-sec crime? Where's the logic in that. There is none. Ye, I know, HTFU and stuff.

Also, let's get it straight - I'm not against ganks per se, I'm against mechanics prone to abuse and against folks acting like absolute jerks towards other folks while hiding behind 'it's just a game' argument. The fact that it's just a game does not mean you can treat others like trash (like you wouldn't in a soccer or any other real life person-to-person contact based game for example).

not the numbers, they seem fine, your conclusion that it isn't worth it because it's hard is what I'm referring to as lazy and foolish.

As for the business of bumps, again you're lacking the will to see your own stated aims through, that's lazy.

If it's about playstyles then why choose one that requires you to fight fire with fire, then refuse to use fire and whinge that fire is op .

This is why no one takes the ag community seriously, how can we when ye don't even take your own stated aims seriously and then vehemently swear about your playstyle being ineffectual.

Make no mistake here I wish ye did and I dare say CODE. Would aswell because it makes for a more engaging experience.
the counterplay is there is ye just pulled yer collective fingers out and take it seriously.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#351 - 2015-06-24 09:46:30 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

[quote]ganking bumper is the most hilariously effective thing to do, its yer own fault ye cant fight them with their own means.

I'm sorry, but if ganking bumpers is the only way out then there is something wrong in the game mechanics. What do you do if you are bumped by two tanked machariels. Or three? Gank them all. Sure Roll.


Either English isn't your first language or you're just bad at reading comprehension - he's saying bump the gankers.

I once had a target bump-tackled and, with the best of intentions, made a complete fool of myself in front of none less than the Saviour of highsec (praise Him!). How? By giving the target a gentle love-tap as the gank fleet landed, intending to make sure they couldn't get to warp. Catalysts have an effective range of about 3 centimeters, so nullifying them with a bump (or bumping their target away from them) is easy as pie and comes with no Concord aggression).

Actually I got smartphoned there but yes you got it.

I have also actually seen the bump Mach get ganked before and it's outrageously funny when it happens
Otso Bakarti
Doomheim
#352 - 2015-06-24 10:36:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Otso Bakarti
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
... You must be really really bad at this game, it just does not get more obvious than this.
Of course, that's all you're really trying to say; makes one wonder why you use all those other words.

Oh, and OP - you went t!ts up on us. I had no idea your heels were so round. No point after all? Nice.
See if that stops your new peer group.

There just isn't anything that can be said!

Garadim
#353 - 2015-06-24 10:47:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Garadim
I read a lot of interesting content but most the time if you express something against ganking in high sec you will be locked and trolled to death.

The forum have no consideration about how you can feel after investing all this time and money in the game. You are only allowed to say the game is great, accept your loss over and over against the high sec gankers.

They don't play eve. They just use you to play it for free.
IRL, scamming and ransoming people is illegal in my country. But in Eve they are the most predominant activities. And to add, it is allowed and encouraged. If you express yourself against this on the forum your topic will be trolled to death by pro gankers then closed by an ISD. That is why i rarely post anything. The gankers say they are free to play how they want. BUT the others are not allowed to do the same. They even rules how you have to play and what you have to buy if you are a miner by example.

With reasons, i am also retiring for some time, need a break.

The reason i started playing eve was the mining, the industry and the hauling.
I have 3 accounts, an orca and a freighter. That is my way to play eve but i am not allowed to really do it, enjoy it. Because you are told how to play by the gankers in high sec.

Concord is a joke and should be removed completely. It give the false sentiment to the new comer that they are protected in some way.

I have been ganked one time, mining in a hulk so i probably deserved it to a ganker point of view.
I have been ganked (other account) when exiting jita in a shuttle (flying manually to jump asap like always) by a player who have an historical records of killing shuttle in high sec using smart bomb (empty cargo).

For the moment i see no reason why i should keep playing. I am really tired about the gankers in high sec and i see no where that ccp care about the problem.

It is a PVP game. I am a PVE gamer trying to find a way to enjoy this game because the mining and industrial part is great. Trusting people in this game is a problem so i see no reason why i should waste my time and isk trying to find a good corp in null / wh who do mining and industry. An orca is not free, a freighter cost a lot. I can replace them but i see no reason to risk them like that in a system that encourage crime and abuse against people who cannot defend in high sec. Eve is probably best if you are a ganker. But sadly for me it is far away from my personnal values and the person i am.

I expressed my personnal view point and what i feel since a long time.

Have a nice day / play.
Jack Hayson
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#354 - 2015-06-24 11:05:55 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
I could say that the game is stacked in favour of criminals (insta undocks, ability of -10's to reside in high-sec, concord response timers, 'prepping' the systems, game geography providing clear chokepoint, etc.)


It's not really CCP's fault that the "criminals" understand how to use the game mechanics to their advantage and you don't.
There are a lot of game mechanics that allow you to avoid getting ganked - however they only work when you use them.
Capt Starfox
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#355 - 2015-06-24 11:06:23 UTC
Finn McCoul wrote:
The freighter was lost and so was our Orca which again was bought for by player donations. Over 2 billion in losses which our corp simply can’t afford to replace.

If that grief wasn’t enough...


You know it's your fault, right? The lossmail I mean. And, since when did PvP become griefing?

Glad to see the New Order continuing to rattle the cage that is highsec.

Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet

Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#356 - 2015-06-24 11:18:43 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

[quote]ganking bumper is the most hilariously effective thing to do, its yer own fault ye cant fight them with their own means.

I'm sorry, but if ganking bumpers is the only way out then there is something wrong in the game mechanics. What do you do if you are bumped by two tanked machariels. Or three? Gank them all. Sure Roll.


Either English isn't your first language or you're just bad at reading comprehension - he's saying bump the gankers.

I once had a target bump-tackled and, with the best of intentions, made a complete fool of myself in front of none less than the Saviour of highsec (praise Him!). How? By giving the target a gentle love-tap as the gank fleet landed, intending to make sure they couldn't get to warp. Catalysts have an effective range of about 3 centimeters, so nullifying them with a bump (or bumping their target away from them) is easy as pie and comes with no Concord aggression).

Actually I got smartphoned there but yes you got it.

I have also actually seen the bump Mach get ganked before and it's outrageously funny when it happens


Not sure how I was supposed to understand that you got autocorrected, although that other guy is from code, hence not worth reflecting on. As for the bumping - let me enlighten you - bumping the bumper is anything but 'hilariously effective'. If anything it is hilariously ineffective. Yes I have a bumping fit Mach and yes I've tried/done it. You'll bump the mach every now and then, but if you are facing a semi-competent pilot it is usually impossible to stop freighter bumping that way as he only needs to land a bump every once in a while.
And yes, English is not my first language.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#357 - 2015-06-24 11:37:19 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:

Since you already have the deck fully stacked in favour of you (invincible, 100% effective police assistance and such) I don't see how CCP can further help you without damaging the whole game in the process.


I could say that the game is stacked in favour of criminals (insta undocks, ability of -10's to reside in high-sec, concord response timers, 'prepping' the systems, game geography providing clear chokepoint, etc.) but I'm not saying that since I'm trying to post constructively, unlike you. Enjoy your trolling/spamming.


You *could* say that, but in my experience most people try to avoid sounding like idiots.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#358 - 2015-06-24 11:54:20 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
not the numbers, they seem fine, your conclusion that it isn't worth it because it's hard is what I'm referring to as lazy and foolish.

My conclusion is that it's not worth it because, well, it's not worth it ("not effective" might make it easier to comprehend).

Quote:
As for the business of bumps, again you're lacking the will to see your own stated aims through, that's lazy.

As you've seen I've tried counter bumping, so - nope I'm not lazy and (again and again) you're making wrong assumptions.

Quote:
If it's about playstyles then why choose one that requires you to fight fire with fire, then refuse to use fire and whinge that fire is op .

You mix playstyles and consequences of playstyles - you want to play the ganker, ok - you know the consequences. You want to play the good guy - why should you get the same consequences as the ganker, or even give the ganker the tools to determine your level of freedom in high security space (i.e. killrights).

Quote:
This is why no one takes the ag community seriously, how can we when ye don't even take your own stated aims seriously and then vehemently swear about your playstyle being ineffectual.

AG Community is made of a very loose bunch of players, some of whom are quite competent, knowledgeable and dedicated in terms of understanding game mechanics and pvping gankers, however it really is a fairly small community in terms of folks continually engaged in it. Reasons could be various - folks find anti-ganking to be not worth their time (as they want to make isk, pursue their pve or whatever else interests them in the game) and who can blame them - if you're in anti-ganking you're focusing your efforts and time on an activity where a lot of game mechanics are working against you for very little return (unless getting a 'thank you' mail is in fact worth your time). Playing a good samaritan on average doesn't pay that well as being a ganker (in the current situation) does and you'll have to trust me that I do know that for a fact.

Quote:
Make no mistake here I wish ye did and I dare say CODE. Would aswell because it makes for a more engaging experience.the counterplay is there is ye just pulled yer collective fingers out and take it seriously.

I think you're gravely mistaken if you think CODE wants more challenges. If nothing I've noticed them growing sourer and sourer as some of us devised more effective ways to counter some of their tactics. If CODE wanted a more 'engaging' experience in terms of pvp they could go to lowsec and play for a losing fw faction for example. That's what some of them are shouting in local when they fail ('show me you solo kills in lowsec' etc.). However, as am alliance they don't do that - reasons are simple, in highsec, thanks to the current state of things, they are practically untouchable and they like it that way.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#359 - 2015-06-24 11:57:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
If I so wished, I could sit in Uedama and pick off Catalysts, pre gank, all day without Concord batting an eyelid or gaining any sort of criminal flag. You'd be wise to learn how game mechanics work before making stupid assumptions and comments.

Please do that and tell me how it contributes in stopping ganks. to paraphrase yourself - you'd be wise to know what you're talking about before making stupid assumptions and comments.
I was countering your claim of not being able to shoot at gankers without gaining a GCC flag. I didn't say that it was a particularly effective way of stopping a gank in progress, because that would be a lie; the most effective defenses against ganks take place before undocking.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#360 - 2015-06-24 12:00:23 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
I was countering your claim of not being able to shoot at gankers without gaining a GCC flag, I was not saying that it was a particularly effective way of stopping a gank in progress


Well your claim is wrong since you presume that all gankers are -5 or below. They are not.