These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Toxic Yaken for CSM XII - Highsec Candidate

Author
Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#1 - 2017-01-26 05:46:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Toxic Yaken
My name is Toxic Yaken, and I’m running for CSM XII as a Highsec Candidate.

About Me
 
I currently live with old friends in Nullsec as a member of the Dickwad Squad, part of Legio De Mortem and the larger Phoenix Federation in the South. I also maintain my Highsec funtimes with an alt in Fly Fearless trying to help newbros and learning how to FC against wardeccers, as well as having a ganking alt for funding my activities.

I’ve been playing EVE Online for about 3 years, with the vast majority of my time spent in Highsec as a scammer, pirate, ganker, and wardeccer. When I first heard of EVE Online I was enticed into the game by the prospect of “Being the Villain,” though I somewhat ironically ended up mining ice in Highsec. I lived in a bubble for my first few months, not really talking to anyone or learning anything, until one day I was ganked by CODE. for afk mining. This became a major turning point for me to actually delve deeper into the game to get revenge. After being part of several disappointing corporations that promised to teach me how to PVP, I came across the Belligerent Undesirables blog and was taught the ways of Highsec dickery. I started awoxing corporations and ganking to feed my addiction to building an ever-growing pile of loot, and friends that I made along the way also led to me joining wardec corporations, to better learn how to hunt and PVP. While I think I've softened a bit over the last few years, I still see Highsec as my home.
 
Last year, I ran for CSM to represent the ganking and wardeccing communities. I wanted to be honest to myself and represent the playstyles and lifestyles that I enjoy in EVE Online in spite of them being pretty small communities to draw support from. Knowing that I would run again this year, I tried to use my spare time to experiment with different projects that I thought would provide players with opportunities to communicate their opinions. During the summer, I started doing interviews with Highsec players to get a better grasp of what these players thought of different aspects of Highsec gameplay and posting these conversations on a blog. While these interviews were enjoyable and helped me gain a better perspective of what players thought about the game, I didn’t really like the format as means of collecting information, and many of the interviews that I started with players were never finished due to challenge of being online at the same time (My schedule wasn’t amazing.) During the Fall I organized a wardec roundtable for players and the CSM to discuss several issues with wardecs, which turned out great and was well received by those in the CSM that attended. As a follow up I also rebooted the Wardec Project, (originally conceived by Jason Quixos and Tora Bushido) where players are free to participate in discussions on the subject of wardecs and ways to potentially improve them on our open Discord channel and ideas are recorded for future referencing and discussion. (Feel free to hop on and join the conversation)
 
Communication
 
Over the course of the last few months there have been some complaints about visibility and communication of CSM XI with the community. A lot of work and discussions occur behind the scenes, and seeing CSM activity for oneself is a matter of knowing where to look. If you’re not part someone actively following along on appropriate media or with the CSM members themselves it can be kind of hard to find. The CSM website doesn’t even provide a good impression of the CSM’s activity or thoughts – most of the postings are almost a year old. On top of that, every elected candidate is going to have a different opinion of what their role in the CSM is supposed to be - we can look at Jin’Taan and Mr Hyde as an example. Jin’Taan has been actively organizing townhalls, slogging through chats, and trying to be at the forefront of relations with the community, while Mr Hyde’s stance has been that he was elected as a representative of his voters and when he needed other player’s opinions he would search for those he believed had a strong understanding of the subject matter. Neither of these styles of representation is ‘bad’, but they may not align with the expectations of some players. If elected, my plan would be to make the CSM more visible to the community by focusing on pushing out more community based discussions, including townhalls and open chats like I have for the Wardec Project, and working to expand promotions of these discussions for a greater participation.
 
Perspective
 
While smaller changes may be easier to push for, I want to try and follow the realistic expectation that the direction that CCP wants to development EVE may not align with my own opinions. My hope is that, if elected, I would be able to learn the path that CCP wants to follow and make suggestions that would benefit that vision. I recognize that while the staff of CCP may be willing to hear my opinions and those of the community, it is ultimately their game and their decisions. As such the following opinions on Highsec are my own, and this platform shouldn’t be taken as promises but rather where my mind is for these subjects.

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#2 - 2017-01-26 05:47:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Toxic Yaken
New Player Experience
 
With the Ascension update we saw an influx of new and returning players and an update to the new player experience. The new introductory arc for teaching players the basics was definitely a step in the right direction, and I’m hopeful that the next iterations will build well off of what they have now. What I would like to see made part of the NPE is a better impression of the impact a player can have on their surroundings and universe. Choices and consequences have always been a big part of EVE, but the NPE as is exists only to teach the fundamentals and basic ways to make isk. With only a couple of hours on average to grab new players, even having the tutorial give examples of the kind of impacts they can make on the game could be enough to keep playing. I’ve also had a few newbros tell me that they thought the tutorial could stand to be longer, or alternatively offer advanced teachings that focused on educating players on more advanced mechanics like fleet UI or corporation mechanics. I also love the initiative that CSM members are making for basic suggested fittings of ships for newer players trying to figure out how to fit, and the flight academy tutorial videos needing to be made more visible to new players who are already struggling hardcore with learning all the UI already. 
 
Corporations Social Groups
 
I have seen tons of fledgling Highsec corporations that more or less exist because corporations provide the social structure that guilds, clans, and clubs offer in other MMORPGs. Corporations are easy to setup and offer all the tools that the aforementioned social structures provide in other games, but these tools will sometimes be underutilized by those who don’t plan to or understand how to use them. As an alternative for those who are not interested in building up their space, such as taking sovereignty or setting up structures, I think that the introduction of social groups would better suit their interests. Social groups could offer all of the social benefits of a regular corporation, such as private channel, member list, titles, etc. Unlike corporations they wouldn’t have the ability to alter the rate of taxation, anchor large structures, take sovereignty, or engage in wars. Allowing players to be able to join multiple social groups could give rise to more community based groups established in game, rather than outside of it. I know that this idea has been pitched before, but for players whoo are just getting started, don’t plan on having citadels or taking sovereignty, or are trying to avoid the risks that come with being in a corporation, creating a society could become the optimal choice over a corporation.
 
I like the idea of corporations of an investment of time and effort, so another idea I have been toying with is the idea of corporation specializations. When you start a new corporation you could be presented with a variety of options to develop your corporations benefits – so for example, you could give industrial corporations choices like slightly higher mining yields, improved industrial build times/material efficiency, faster producing/better yields on planetary interaction, etc. Increased rewards of loyalty points and isk could be handed out to those who specialize in Empire protection operations such as missions, incursions, faction warfare, and general ratting. Rather than just choosing which benefits your corporation would receive, the best way to receive these benefits would come from the members banding together to work toward their specialization. With multiple levels of proficiency goals corporations could either attempt to maximize their specialization in a small scope of skills or provide a more balanced approach across different bonuses.
 
Services
 
I would love to see the creation of an in-game services hub where players can advertise or look for services; mercenary work, industrial contracts, hauling, intelligence work, etc. Besides giving these services more visibility to the average player, it could also give newer players a better impression of the impact that they can make on the universe. Let’s say you and your newbro friends want to start a new industrial group that wants to create T1 frigates to cruisers – sure, you could always just sell them on the market, but let’s say you instead take a contract building ships for some players in faction warfare. Now there is more visibility to what your work is being used for, you’re communicating with other players and getting a better understanding of their universe, and you’re building relationships.

Wars
 
Regardless of where you might fly in space, almost everyone has experienced a wardec. For a lot of players these wars were likely underwhelming, with no notable engagements, aside from some careless players getting caught visiting a trade hub. A lot of these wars are declared to ensure content for the wardeccer’s corporation or alliance, rather than achieving a specific goal. To that end wars can be lackluster, as quality wars are those that are created with some sort of intent, whether it be tearing down every public citadel in Perimeter or simply getting revenge on someone who wronged you. But again, these quality wars are the exception, in part because there really aren’t a lot of motivations to go to war over Highsec space. 

[Cont.]

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#3 - 2017-01-26 05:48:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Toxic Yaken
If the aggressors have one advantage, it is the ability to control the length of war. Over the last year I’ve seen a lot of discussions regarding giving wars an objective for both sides to fulfill in order to end a war, because for a lot of players a war is essentially just keeping them from playing the game they want to play. The main idea has been focused around giving the attackers a structure or citadel module that can be destroyed for the war to end. I’m personally not a huge fan of turning all wars into a kind of attack and defend like game, partially because of the potential of throwing the whole wardeccing and mercenary culture into disarray. I’ve personally raised the suggestion of a system wherein players could shorten the overall length of the war by meeting preset activity thresholds tied to their corporation’s specialization, as a way to fight the war without actually fighting. All in all, this is still a pretty big subject of discussion within the Wardec Project discord.
 
I don’t want to see every Highsec corporation fold at the sight of a wardec notification. The players that tend to live in Highsec usually have little recourse when faced with experienced wardeccers intent on invading their space, and even thought this is no different than being attacked in any other space, there really aren’t a lot of clear options. The greatest advantage for defenders is their ability to recruit allies to their defense, but who do you hire and where do you find them? Again, I would love to see the creation of an in-game services hub for players to find this support, as well as providing links to it in both the wardec notification and on the war report so that any players that at least take the time to read can have some idea of what to do next. I’d also like to see an improvement to diplomatic options for wars, such as options to change the length of wardec protection from the aggressor, or allow for an exchange of assets/structures. But for the most part, being a defender means taking more precautions. 

The removal of watchlists last year heralded in another big change for a lot of Highsec wardeccers, generally breaking down some of the smaller and more hunting focused groups in favour of larger blanket wardeccing groups to ensure consistent content. Lord Razpataz of Devil’s Warrior Alliance created a big thread about it on the EVEO forums, and has since been actively calling for the return of watchlists or a rework to locator agents which would at least tell if a player was offline or not for a fee. Though I’m generally under the impression that there is little chance that CCP would ever return watchlists in any capacity, I would be happy to see locator agents have some sort of rework to better serve wardeccers.

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#4 - 2017-01-26 05:50:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Toxic Yaken
Ganking
 
Ganking is true non-consensual Highsec PVP and I love it. Players gank for different reasons - I gank for profit, I know groups that gank the neutral freighters of their enemies, and some even gank out of ideological beliefs. CCP clearly recognizes the need for ganking as a way to punish taking risks in Highsec, but the way that they rework ganking mechanics is very hands off. It feels like they view the ganking community as wolves and the rest of the players as sheep, and as if they think the wolves are getting too out of control they will make the sheep a bit harder to eat. I’d like more clarity on what CCP thinks of ganking as a whole if elected but for now I want to focus on some of the common arguments against ganking.

The main complaints that I hear related to the ganking are:
1.        Ganking has a negative impact on newer players
2.        Ganking is a low-risk activity for the ganker
3.        Ganking offers little opportunity for interaction
 
The first complaint is valid to an extent. I know that my activities have made players quit, and though I don’t target players by age, I have definitely blown up newbros hauling everything they own. My personal experience with being ganked proved to be a turning point for me in EVE, and even CCP has pointed out that retention is higher amongst players who are blown up in their initial time playing… but obviously not everyone is going to have the same reaction to losing their possessions. 

The second point is also valid to an extent. In classic EVE tradition, gankers have min-maxed the hell out of ganking to the point where CODE. provides a spreadsheet for calculating the amount of damage needed to break the tank of any mining barge or exhumer based on fittings. The complaint is similar to complaining that Highsec incursion runners have too low-risk for their reward - It’s generally safe because they have optimized their fits and operations to ensure optimal clearing of otherwise challenging sites. Killrights and a negative security statuses can be detrimental for some types of ganking or trying to enjoy other activities, but otherwise don’t matter to those who live the -10.0 ganking lifestyle. You can try to change the values of hull hp, change criminal timers,  change concord response times, and so on, but gankers will inevitably adapt and mix-max their way back to relative prosperity.

The final point is where I think there is the best opportunity for improvements to ganking. While there is counterplay to some aspects of ganking, such as counter bumping a bumper to try to free a freighter or trying to jam ships to ensure they can’t finish off their targets, it’s usually not much fun. Trying to disrupt a gank doesn’t even feel like you’re doing more than whoring on a kill most times. I would love to inevitably find a way that allows players to try and police gankers rather than the NPCs to some capacity while not imposing on a gankers ability to kill someone, but in all honesty I feel like the crimewatch system needs an overhaul before we can reach that point.

(Edit:) I’ve been toying with the idea of changing the way that CONCORD works, that instead of nuking a criminal after eventually arriving on scene, that they would simply apply significant damage reduction to that criminal. Eventually faction police would arrive and slowly tear them apart, but it could provide anti-ganking players with more ability to meaningfully interfere with ganks as it would take significantly longer to kill someone under the damage reduction. It could also lead to more freedom for gankers to use different ships than just max DPS gallente blaster boats or stealth bombers. The biggest downside to this would be that I think it would make ganking more prevalent in general because well tanked, larger hulls would be able to terrorize players outside of largely populated space. My thoughts here are still a work in progress but I’ve been reaching out to gankers, and soon anti-gankers for their opinions on the subject to hopefully build up some better ideas.

Missions

I know that this had been talked to death - Missions are repetitive, and lack a lot of substance. Some people enjoy them, but for a lot of players it is simply part of their grind to earn isk for other activities. It would be nice to see more variety and challenge introduced to missions with the newer Drifter AI for those that enjoy running them, but what I would really like to see is challenging missions that require small groups to run. Restrict the number of players that can run the mission to a certain amount and give these players that like PVE something more interesting to do than just running the same missions together on easy-mode.

---


Thank you for taking the time to read my platform. If you have any comments, concerns, questions, etc. feel free to post in this thread or contact me:

Ingame: Toxic Yaken
Twitter: @Toxic_Yaken
Tweetfleet Slack: Toxic Yaken

Also please consider checking out The Wardec Project Discord!

--

Interviews:
https://crossingzebras.com/csm-chat-toxic-yaken/

--

Fly Fearless. Pirate

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Troy Amarr
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2017-01-26 06:26:46 UTC
Great post toxic!
Cyclo Hexanol
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#6 - 2017-01-27 01:34:26 UTC
This pirate has stolen my vote. And my heart.

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

King of Stating the Obvious 2015

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Elected by: Random forum alt

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Penance Toralen
Compass Fox
#7 - 2017-01-30 06:04:37 UTC
Toxic Yaken wrote:
About Meone day I was ganked by CODE. for afk mining. This became a major turning point for me to actually delve deeper into the game to get revenge.


So, did after all you learned, did you get your revenge on CODE?
Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#8 - 2017-01-30 15:55:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Toxic Yaken
Penance Toralen wrote:
Toxic Yaken wrote:
About Meone day I was ganked by CODE. for afk mining. This became a major turning point for me to actually delve deeper into the game to get revenge.


So, did after all you learned, did you get your revenge on CODE?


No. I came to terms with my loss as I grew to better understand the game. Eventually I even spent time learning to gank with lessons from a few CODE. folks. The option for revenge is definately there, (anyone familiar with Zopiclone's theft of CODE. assets?) but that's not quite the revenge a lot of gank victims want.

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Dom Arkaral
Unlimited Ripoff Works
#9 - 2017-01-31 01:33:17 UTC
You have my bow kind sir o7

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist

Dracvlad
Tactically Challenged
Tactical Supremacy
#10 - 2017-01-31 07:05:41 UTC
On the face of it a balanced proposal with a good idea of the current balance, however what do you mean exactly in terms of overhauling crimewatch, where does the issue actually lie. Is it the safety bar which you have an issue with, that is actually something that helps AG players in the very difficult task of anti-ganking which is not exactly fun as you quite rightly pointed out.

Most players see the mining barges and exhumers as reasonably well balanced because people have an option to take a yield hit to use a tanky ship such as the Procurer and Skiff, so in affect those people getting blown up in mining ships made choices for yield, which is fine.

The issue with the CODE / Miniluv spreadsheet approach rests entirely with freighter ganking, but the issue in that area is more to do with bumping, because they can hold the freighter there indefinitely while assembling a gank fleet, that part of it needs looking at because it is not a dash to see if they can slip through and results in stale uninteresting play. That needs sorting.

With the arrival of citadels perhaps now is the time for NPC stations to have penalties for the criminal security status.

The war dec system is fine, but the fee for very large alliances needs to be reduced, and there has to be restrictions to prevent continuous war decs, but on the other hand I would make the war dec follow a character if he joins any player corp within the week of the war dec applying.

I am not in favour of something artificial to fight over but your suggestion of an impact in reducing the war dec time based on activity is a good suggestion The removal of the watch list is a good thing in terms of hisec wars as people can operate off the beaten path. which improves things. I would support the locator agents giving on-line status as people have suggested, however with one proviso, should I have very high standings with those agents corps they also tell me that I am being checked on, everything has to have a risk.

It would be good to have a player who while a ganker actually sees the balance side of things, though I would like to see a bit more meat on the bone in terms of proposals. So far I am interested in what you have put up.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Ralph King-Griffin
The Romi Inquisition
#11 - 2017-01-31 14:17:58 UTC
Toxic has my vote.
I believe he is going to represent my concerns well.

Drac
The issues with crimewatch primarily revolve around logistics.
I think we can all agree that neutral logi feels like getting bullshitted and no one likes it.
it's directly impacted my and many others ability to get a fight because people assume +3 of local will appear in guardians as soon as they commit.

For another example , you gain a suspect flag for providing logistics to someone who's war you are allied in, which is extremely unintuitive.

In short it's impeding warfare where it shouldn't and needs a good looking at.
Dracvlad
Tactically Challenged
Tactical Supremacy
#12 - 2017-01-31 15:44:40 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Toxic has my vote.
I believe he is going to represent my concerns well.

Drac
The issues with crimewatch primarily revolve around logistics.
I think we can all agree that neutral logi feels like getting bullshitted and no one likes it.
it's directly impacted my and many others ability to get a fight because people assume +3 of local will appear in guardians as soon as they commit.

For another example , you gain a suspect flag for providing logistics to someone who's war you are allied in, which is extremely unintuitive.

In short it's impeding warfare where it shouldn't and needs a good looking at.


Ralph, I was never sure whether they fixed it so that you could rep alliance mates which wa something that got my goat when I realised you could not, has that been fixed now, I know CCP said they would, but saying and doing is two totally different things.

The neutral RR is better than it was previously, in that now they go suspect, it annoyed the hell out of me when you could not even touch them in the past which is why I never partaked of any hisec combat until that stupidity got removed. I actually suggest to people to have an out of corp wing ready to come in on the neutral RR for when they go FY. If people get off their butt and start dealing with them as they go FY then great. All you have to do is follow certain people around and you can nail them. If some people started doing that it would change the attitude a bit, perhaps I should start doing that, a target does come to mind....

I agree the suspect flag for helping someone you are allied with makes no sense what so ever, that needs changing, it would also create more interesting conflict in hisec in my opinion.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#13 - 2017-01-31 16:59:31 UTC
Thanks for saving me from typing out those points about crimewatch and wars Ralph. Big smile

Dracvlad wrote:
On the face of it a balanced proposal with a good idea of the current balance, however what do you mean exactly in terms of overhauling crimewatch, where does the issue actually lie. Is it the safety bar which you have an issue with, that is actually something that helps AG players in the very difficult task of anti-ganking which is not exactly fun as you quite rightly pointed out.


I’m not quite sure what you mean by safety bar, would you mind elaborating?

Dracvlad wrote:
The issue with the CODE / Miniluv spreadsheet approach rests entirely with freighter ganking, but the issue in that area is more to do with bumping, because they can hold the freighter there indefinitely while assembling a gank fleet, that part of it needs looking at because it is not a dash to see if they can slip through and results in stale uninteresting play. That needs sorting.


I don’t have much an issue with CODE./Miniluv having their math already figured out, it was more just to point out how gankers have got their min-maxing down for ganking to reduce their costs and risk. As for bumping my understanding is the CCP doesn’t like it in its current form but haven’t made any progress in their plans to limit the amount of time someone can be bumped while out of combat. Even with a change like this, it would just mean gankers would need more disposable ships to hold down a freighter with a point to reset any progress made towards safely warping out, so I don't know how CCP plan to make this work.

Dracvlad wrote:
With the arrival of citadels perhaps now is the time for NPC stations to have penalties for the criminal security status.


Could you elaborate on why you think this would be a good idea? Most popular ganking systems have multiple public citadels that gankers could safely use – I’m surprised you wouldn’t prefer gankers leaving NPC stations where anti-ganking forces at least have some chance to intercept them.

Dracvlad wrote:
The war dec system is fine, but the fee for very large alliances needs to be reduced, and there has to be restrictions to prevent continuous war decs, but on the other hand I would make the war dec follow a character if he joins any player corp within the week of the war dec applying.

I am not in favour of something artificial to fight over but your suggestion of an impact in reducing the war dec time based on activity is a good suggestion The removal of the watch list is a good thing in terms of hisec wars as people can operate off the beaten path. which improves things. I would support the locator agents giving on-line status as people have suggested, however with one proviso, should I have very high standings with those agents corps they also tell me that I am being checked on, everything has to have a risk.


There has been a bit of discussion in the Wardec Project about costs for declaring wars, and I’m inclined to agree with you on that point. I still think there are other issues to explore, such as some that Ralph pointed out already. I also worry that giving aggressors a structure that can be destroyed to end the war would have serious repercussions on the wardeccing community as a whole. I’m sure that some readers might laugh at the concept of this, so let me explain my concern.

Smaller wardec corporations are generally better at getting defenders to participate in Highsec wars than larger ones because they come across as defeatable. When watchlists were removed last year, there was a decline in smaller sized wardeccing entities because hunting for content became more difficult for them, and forcing them to defend structures will only further push them into larger groups or out of wardeccing entirely. At that point it becomes a question of what do the bigger Highsec wardeccing and mercenary groups need to do to ensure that they can continue to maintain content for their members? Could it lead to them forming the biggest bluest donut possible? Could that in turn lead to these larger groups monopolizing Highsec wardeccing by knocking over the smaller competitions citadels? Would there be fewer wars declared against larger entities and more of a shift towards targeting smaller less capable groups? Would this change be more helpful for the average Highsec defender or is this change more for bigger groups? I think these are just a few of the questions that need exploring on this idea alone.

I’m also sure some wardeccers would love your suggestion of wars following players who attempt to evade them, but no, I disagree on that point. I’d rather see reworks to corporations to incentivize players to stay and defend their corporation.

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#14 - 2017-01-31 17:00:21 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
It would be good to have a player who while a ganker actually sees the balance side of things, though I would like to see a bit more meat on the bone in terms of proposals. So far I am interested in what you have put up.


To be honest I don’t have a lot of meat for the subject of ganking in part because I’m trying to balance what gankers think ganking should be, what anti-gankers think it should be, and what I think CCP wants it to be. I’ve been toying with the idea of changing the way that CONCORD works, that instead of nuking a criminal after eventually arriving on scene, that they would simply apply significant damage reduction to that criminal. Eventually faction police would arrive and slowly tear them apart, but it could provide anti-ganking players with more ability to meaningfully interfere with ganks as it would take significantly longer to kill someone under the damage reduction. It could also lead to more freedom for gankers to use different ships than just max DPS gallente blaster boats or stealth bombers. The biggest downside to this would be that I think it would make ganking more prevalent in general because well tanked, larger hulls would be able to terrorize players outside of largely populated space. My thoughts here are still a work in progress but I’ve been reaching out to gankers, and soon anti-gankers for their opinions on the subject to hopefully build up some better ideas.

Thanks for your points; I will update the platform accordingly after work. Pirate

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Dracvlad
Tactically Challenged
Tactical Supremacy
#15 - 2017-01-31 19:25:52 UTC
Safety bar is where you can set your engagement parameters Green full safety, you don't attack anyone unless they are suspect, if you are repping someone and they go suspect you stop that rep, suspect allows you to go suspect in such a situation and allows you to enage suspects and have a limited timer and so on. It has made people a lot more sure to do stuff n hisec.

The bumping mechanic gives them total strategic control over the situation and enables them to stackup victms, instead of a rush to get on a juicy freighter to gank it, it is just hold it in place and gank at their leisure. Without bumping people would take risks to sneak through and it would reward clever play like keeping an eye out for ganks before moving through choke points, it would reward clever players who had their wits about them.

If you remove docking rights then it becomes a conflict point, you can as a group start to threaten citadel owners who don't block them from entering, and if they still let them then blow it up, this will create conflict. The gankers will of course put their own up and people will have additional reasons to blow them up. I know of a couple of ganker owned citadels and if people saw this as a value thing to do to make their life more difficult then it would create a new conflict driver.

In reality catching gankers as they mass undock and warp to an instra undock is not easy as they use small fast ships, it is like trying to catch them as they mass jump through a gate, the lag can be an issue. Many of us wan to see more reasons to have war decs and citadels used by gankers would be a good one.

I disagree with a structure that you are forced to defend so we agree, catch the flag type rubbish does not sit in what to me should be a strategy game, I for one would not do it. I have suggested an OA per constellation for a watch list type system of some sort as something to create conflict but the war dec mercs were mainly camping choke points and hubs anyway,. I think Raitaru's are too weak, same is true of Astrahus, most hisec players have no chance against the mercs or the small corps that attack them, perhaps this will force them to band together so having it as it is no is perhaps a chicken and egg situation for more meaningful hisec entities to form. At the moment most of hisec are one man corps on full avoidance mode, taht does not work going forward and will create change.

The suggestion of the war dec following was to get around people closing corps and resetting up as before, the reasons for defending their corp or even go into space require something to defend. An abstract something ion space would not work for me as I would just go play Witcher 3 or Skyrim or JC to Stain. The EC's and Citadels could do the business for this as being something to defend. The blanket war decs while silly in one sense don't bother me because they don't hunt, so as I avoid the pipes and hubs when I get a war dec by them it does not matter and the good thing is that more people are doing things in space since the watch lists went, which will get to a balance as people will start hunting again, the change to the loactor agents will push that change.

You CONCORD suggestions are interesting, because having larger ships to take benefit from this change would enable people to catch them, add that to the reduction in bumping and we get some fun conflict.

Thanks for the replies and thinking it through, I often get accused of being against PvP in fact I think ganking adds to the game, I want it to be more of a conflict driver as compared to a certain number of multi-boxers having a massive ISK making deal from it and such stale gameplay. I will keep an eye on things but you are looking likely to get my votes.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#16 - 2017-02-01 05:25:07 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Safety bar is where you can set your engagement parameters Green full safety, you don't attack anyone unless they are suspect, if you are repping someone and they go suspect you stop that rep, suspect allows you to go suspect in such a situation and allows you to enage suspects and have a limited timer and so on. It has made people a lot more sure to do stuff n hisec.


I've never heard of referred to as the safety 'bar' before, thanks for the clarification.

Dracvlad wrote:
The bumping mechanic gives them total strategic control over the situation and enables them to stackup victms, instead of a rush to get on a juicy freighter to gank it, it is just hold it in place and gank at their leisure. Without bumping people would take risks to sneak through and it would reward clever play like keeping an eye out for ganks before moving through choke points, it would reward clever players who had their wits about them.


I understand where you're coming from, I'm just stating that CCP seems to have hit a roadblock with their plans to change bumping, and I don't know if it's going to happen in the foreseeable future.

Dracvlad wrote:
I disagree with a structure that you are forced to defend so we agree, catch the flag type rubbish does not sit in what to me should be a strategy game, I for one would not do it. I have suggested an OA per constellation for a watch list type system of some sort as something to create conflict but the war dec mercs were mainly camping choke points and hubs anyway,. I think Raitaru's are too weak, same is true of Astrahus, most hisec players have no chance against the mercs or the small corps that attack them, perhaps this will force them to band together so having it as it is no is perhaps a chicken and egg situation for more meaningful hisec entities to form. At the moment most of hisec are one man corps on full avoidance mode, taht does not work going forward and will create change.


I would love to see more cooperation between smaller Highsec groups but the gaps of skill and knowledge between wardeccers and newer players is pretty large. It's part of the reason I wanted to advocate for service advertisements so groups could look for that help they need in potentially fighting a wardeccer.

Dracvlad wrote:
The suggestion of the war dec following was to get around people closing corps and resetting up as before, the reasons for defending their corp or even go into space require something to defend. An abstract something ion space would not work for me as I would just go play Witcher 3 or Skyrim or JC to Stain. The EC's and Citadels could do the business for this as being something to defend. The blanket war decs while silly in one sense don't bother me because they don't hunt, so as I avoid the pipes and hubs when I get a war dec by them it does not matter and the good thing is that more people are doing things in space since the watch lists went, which will get to a balance as people will start hunting again, the change to the loactor agents will push that change.


I'm hopeful that some of the future structures coming out may further the idea of building up a corporation or alliance's space and hopefully create more incentive for defenders to fight... We'll see.

Dracvlad wrote:
You CONCORD suggestions are interesting, because having larger ships to take benefit from this change would enable people to catch them, add that to the reduction in bumping and we get some fun conflict.

Thanks for the replies and thinking it through, I often get accused of being against PvP in fact I think ganking adds to the game, I want it to be more of a conflict driver as compared to a certain number of multi-boxers having a massive ISK making deal from it and such stale gameplay. I will keep an eye on things but you are looking likely to get my votes.


Appreciate your questions and support! I know you poke your head into C&P sometimes (I normally lurk there) and I'm happy to discuss these things with people from the other side. If you ever have any other questions feel free to drop them here or send me a mail.

Toxic Pirate

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#17 - 2017-02-11 19:29:23 UTC
In response to the reduction of seats for CSM XII, Commander Aze, Roedyn, and myself are encouraging anyone interested in seeing more Highsec representation in the next CSM to vote for the three of us as their first three choices.

Vote strategically and vote for Highsec.

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Les Routiers
Proudly Snoring
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#18 - 2017-02-12 00:14:39 UTC
Toxic Yaken wrote:
I currently live with ... Legio De Mortem and the larger Phoenix Federation in the South


I voted for you last year, and might do it again this year if I can stop crying over that sad fate.

Other than that, thanks for the good work on the wardecs. There was a guy from RFF last year who also wanted to make wardecs fun, in last year's candidates. Don't know what he's become, but if you get in touch maybe you can bounce ideas with him.

Good luck, even though... FCON... seriously? right, good luck anyway.

http://fr.capstable.net/ - podcast en français sur Eve online.

Toxic Yaken
The Dickwad Squad
Rote Kapelle
#19 - 2017-02-12 00:55:23 UTC
Les Routiers wrote:
Toxic Yaken wrote:
I currently live with ... Legio De Mortem and the larger Phoenix Federation in the South


I voted for you last year, and might do it again this year if I can stop crying over that sad fate.

Other than that, thanks for the good work on the wardecs. There was a guy from RFF last year who also wanted to make wardecs fun, in last year's candidates. Don't know what he's become, but if you get in touch maybe you can bounce ideas with him.

Good luck, even though... FCON... seriously? right, good luck anyway.


Appreciate the support! I actually have him on my buddy list already from last year - I was already planning on dropping him a line to go over his thoughts about contracts which kinda tied into my desire for a services hub, but I'll be sure to talk about him about that too.

Sorry about your feelings about FCON, if it makes you feel any better I'm more actively playing in my Highsec corp learning how to FC a band of bloodthirsty newbros.

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Ashterothi
Aideron Robotics
Federation Uprising
#20 - 2017-02-12 01:56:26 UTC
123Next page