These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Pirate Battleships & Absurd Ganker Arguments

First post
Author
Salvos Rhoska
#141 - 2017-02-25 11:34:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
They are already warned if they are at the keyboard. If you are targeted by a scanner you get an animation and a sound.

The only thing that would change is that instead of scanning with the scout ship they would bring in an alt in a noobship with a scanner to do the job.

Also most AG will not shoot a suspect in anything with weapons since they have no NPC support

But hey, I don't say don't implement it. I just say it wont change much


Sure, they can bring a noobship in an alt, but that also means having to logout to change ship, or paying for an omega alt that wastes all its potential flying in a noobship. Or hiring/involving a legit Alpha noob to participate.

AG would not need NPC support to engage a simple scanning shiip. Infact, they probably wont, because the intel of knowing there is a cargo scanning ship is reason enough for them to consider they might be in the right place to engage against a suicide gank effort.

Its a soft change. Just takes a bit of the edge off, and provides a little more surface area for conflict (ie: the scanning ship goes flashy).

And I mean overall, I think most people can agree that cargo scanning should be considered a suspect offense.
What business does someone have checking out my cargo hold?
Its an invasive action action on another ship.
You cant legally look through someone elses possessions in IRL either.
Customs NPCs scan for contraband, but they have legitimate reason to do so.
Salvos Rhoska
#142 - 2017-02-25 11:42:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Sure, I can understsnd what you mean, but none of that refutes or contradicts my suggestion above.



This is what we call the just one more nerf argument.

Ganking is already the most punished activity in EVE as well as needing to be one of the most organised as far as highsec goes and undoubtedly the most expensive activity in EVE outside of the suicide dreads.


I already went over the peculiar nature of this in a previous post.

Making cargo scanning a suspect offense in HS, doesnt upset that.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#143 - 2017-02-25 12:05:05 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


I already went over the peculiar nature of this in a previous post.

Making cargo scanning a suspect offense in HS, doesnt upset that.


Why should this happen? Ganking is already at its lowest point in history as is highsec pvp content in general.

Frankly we should be expanding scanning more not punishing more. Bring in more content such as players hunting for drugs and such.
Salvos Rhoska
#144 - 2017-02-25 12:41:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


I already went over the peculiar nature of this in a previous post.

Making cargo scanning a suspect offense in HS, doesnt upset that.


Why should this happen? Ganking is already at its lowest point in history as is highsec pvp content in general.

Frankly we should be expanding scanning more not punishing more. Bring in more content such as players hunting for drugs and such.


The change should happen, because it rationalizes the underlying mechanics.

Cargo scanning is an invasive action. You intrusively pry into the hold of another player.
This should not occur without a reciprocal cost. Currently, there is none.
Having a scanning ship on site, does not in and of itself constitute a cost, because the scanning ship is not currently implicated in any way. They can scan all the ships they want, intrude i to their holds, at no cost or risk.

Cargo-scanning is not mandatory for suicide ganking Its just a convenience to pick out lucrative targets.

If cargo scanning issued a suspect flag, they can still continue scanning as many holds as they wish, unless so eone eliminates them.

We all know that cargo scanning ships are implict in the suicide gank operational system.
They are part of the suicide gank team effort, as much as the attack ships, and the loot pickup ships.
Th attack ships get rekt by CONCORD, the loot pickup teams go suspect.
So too should the cargo scanning elements go suspect.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#145 - 2017-02-25 12:50:34 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

The change should happen, because it rationalizes the underlying mechanics.

Cargo scanning is an invasive action. You intrusively pry into the hold of another player.
This should not occur without a reciprocal cost. Currently, there is none.
Having a scanning ship on site, does not in and of itself constitute a cost, because the scanning ship is not currently implicated in any way. They can scan all the ships they want, intrude i to their holds, at no cost or risk.


So we should do the same with combat probes too then?

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Cargo-scanning is not mandatory for suicide ganking Its just a convenience to pick out lucrative targets.


How else are you going to know what the hauler is carrying to make the call on if it is profitable or not? Its fundamental to ganking.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

If cargo scanning issued a suspect flag, they can still continue scanning as many holds as they wish, unless so eone eliminates them.

We all know that cargo scanning ships are implict in the suicide gank operational system.
They are part of the suicide gank team effort, as much as the attack ships, and the loot pickup ships.
Th attack ships get rekt by CONCORD, the loot pickup teams go suspect.
So too should the cargo scanning elements go suspect.


You have yet to answer why ganking needs yet another nerf.
Salvos Rhoska
#146 - 2017-02-25 13:42:41 UTC
1) Combat probes do not scan the contents of a ship, merely its location at that moment.
Furthemore a combat probe search requires far more time and effort, and is homologous with core probing sigs.

2) My change does not mean they cant ascertain the contents of a ship.
Just that they incur a suspect flag for intrusively obtaining that data of what is on someone elses ship.
What justification is there, for a ship in HS to pry into the contents of somone elses autonomous ship, without consequence?

If a cargo scanning ship is implicit in the suicide gank team effort, they should carry commensurate personal risk.
The attac ships get rekt by CONCORD, the loot ships get suspect.
Atm, the scanning ships get no penalty.

3) This is not a nerf to suicide ganking. None of the mechanics are changed to detriment..
It just includes the rational risk, which is currently absent, into scanning ships which invasively pry into the hold of another autonomous players ship.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#147 - 2017-02-25 13:55:59 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
1) Combat probes do not scan the contents of a ship, merely its location at that moment.
Furthemore a combat probe search requires far more time and effort, and is homologous with core probing sigs.


Combat probes are more than core probes, they are made with the goal of hunting down other ships. Its the same as scanning a ship, both are pvp activities just with slightly differnt goals. One lets you find a players ship even though they don't want you to and the other scans a players ship even though they dont want you to.

It can also lead to other problems such as the bloakade runner now has. CCP adding the unscannable bonus to them did not make them safer, it put more risk on them because the ganks went from targeted to random.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

2) My change does not mean they cant ascertain the contents of a ship.
Just that they incur a suspect flag for intrusively obtaining that data of what is on someone elses ship.
What justification is there, for a ship in HS to pry into the contents of somone elses autonomous ship, without consequence?



You can already counter the scanner.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

3) This is not a nerf to suicide ganking.


Yes it is.
Starrakatt
Celtic Anarchy
Dead Terrorists
#148 - 2017-02-25 14:30:24 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Its a very soft change. Wouldnt affect mission ship suicide ganking largely at all, as you are more concerned with the modules which are unscannable, rather than cargo contents. Wouldnt make suicide ganking impossible along trade lines either, just less certain of their profits.

There is a thing called a Ship Scanner that does exactly that (scan mods) and work on the same principle of that of a Cargo Scanner.

Also by your reasonning, just looking into someone's jettisoned cargo or wreck should trigger a Suspect Timer, as it is prying into someone's privacy...
Wolfgang Jannesen
Czerka.
What Could Possibly Go Wr0ng
#149 - 2017-02-25 14:32:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolfgang Jannesen
There's nothing wrong with cargo scanners. Salvos, your suggestions would make high sec super safe but they're messing with gameplay that is not a problem. If you get ganked in highsec, CCP didnt do anything wrong, you did.
lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Fraternity.
#150 - 2017-02-25 15:50:08 UTC
Wolfgang Jannesen wrote:
There's nothing wrong with cargo scanners. Salvos, your suggestions would make high sec super safe but they're messing with gameplay that is not a problem. If you get ganked in highsec, CCP didnt do anything wrong, you did.


i love those its not me its you quotes. What?
lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Fraternity.
#151 - 2017-02-25 15:52:02 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


I already went over the peculiar nature of this in a previous post.

Making cargo scanning a suspect offense in HS, doesnt upset that.


Why should this happen? Ganking is already at its lowest point in history as is highsec pvp content in general.

Frankly we should be expanding scanning more not punishing more. Bring in more content such as players hunting for drugs and such.


The change should happen, because it rationalizes the underlying mechanics.

Cargo scanning is an invasive action. You intrusively pry into the hold of another player.
This should not occur without a reciprocal cost. Currently, there is none.
Having a scanning ship on site, does not in and of itself constitute a cost, because the scanning ship is not currently implicated in any way. They can scan all the ships they want, intrude i to their holds, at no cost or risk.

Cargo-scanning is not mandatory for suicide ganking Its just a convenience to pick out lucrative targets.

If cargo scanning issued a suspect flag, they can still continue scanning as many holds as they wish, unless so eone eliminates them.

We all know that cargo scanning ships are implict in the suicide gank operational system.
They are part of the suicide gank team effort, as much as the attack ships, and the loot pickup ships.
Th attack ships get rekt by CONCORD, the loot pickup teams go suspect.
So too should the cargo scanning elements go suspect.


perhaps cargo scanning shouldnt be so detailed and accurate rather a bit fuzzy. then you make a decision whether its worth ganking or not
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#152 - 2017-02-25 16:06:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
Eve is a game all about player interaction and you can't deny carebears mostly interact, with each other at least. Which means more players in game shooting things. I don't see why highsec can't be a kiddie pool since quite a large number of people go for that, however it should be obvious that the big money, good ships, and deep mechanics are in the more risky higher value parts of space. When I started you could barely make enough or a battleship in hs but people in null were flying T2 everything, command ships, HACs, recons, etc.

I'd like to see highsec income nerfed into the ground so that it has little impact on the rest of eve. If players want to sit in safety under the protection of concord, how can they hope to defend themselves without that protection, they'd feel the need to join a null corp where they can have a bigger impact if that's what they want. Eve is supposedly a sandbox with room for everyone, yet we continue asking new players to change their expectations to what eve actually is, why can't it have room for everything?

If highsec players aren't flying around in such valuable ships, they're surely less likely to be chosen as a gank target.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#153 - 2017-02-25 16:10:04 UTC
The only thing you will change is making this mechanik unavailable for people who have a problem going suspect. And no you will not need to get a new omega account, every account has 3 char slots and you don't need your ganking char until you scanned something worthwile.

Fun fact:
I don't scann mining ships anymore because more often than not it spooks them and they usually dock up. Progress obviously and another victory for the New Order.
Salvos Rhoska
#154 - 2017-02-25 16:52:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Combat probes are more than core probes, they are made with the goal of hunting down other ships. Its the same as scanning a ship, both are pvp activities just with slightly differnt goals. One lets you find a players ship even though they don't want you to and the other scans a players ship even though they dont want you to.

It can also lead to other problems such as the bloakade runner now has. CCP adding the unscannable bonus to them did not make them safer, it put more risk on them because the ganks went from targeted to random.

You can already counter the scanner.

Yes it is.


1) Combat probes are not tthe same as cargo scanning.
They are furthermore entirely different skill trees.
Combat probes deliver information on location at great range.
Cargo scanning is a matter of kms.
Their function is unique and unlike the other.
Combat probes, especially in HS, are used for finding mission ships onsite, at great range.
Cargo scanning, in HS, is used almost exclusively for the purpose of identifying fat targets, onsite.
(And scanning ghost/relic/data cans)

Invasively scanning the contents of a ships private property, is different from ascertaining a ships current location.
D-scan already makes ascertainment of position possible, albeit without warp-to option.

2) Blockade runners remain unscannable in my proposal, as they are now.
Zero change.

3) Double packing, flooding cargo with trash, are ways of impairing data to a cargo scanner. But they are niot an issue of cargo scanners themselves.
Reiisha
#155 - 2017-02-25 16:54:33 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Reiisha wrote:
Suicide ganking and gatecamping are not a problem whatsoever.

The real problem lies in the unlimited use of alts to sidestep all consequences.

However, that is hilariously difficult to even think about fixing and most people are so ensorceled by the alt meta (which has existed since 2003) that they will defend it to the death, despite the massive problems alts bring to the systems currently in place - Let alone that the game has been quasi designed around the use of alts over the years.

You can bet that if gatecampers and suicide gankers couldn't use alts anymore, they'd be hypocritically crying havoc over how unfair the game is to them once they actually have to deal with the consequences of being at -10.

Sadly, this will likely not happen for a long time, given how critical alts are for nullsec - Even if just to keep the game from being too boring (unless there are people who want to play a fulltime cyno character for example).


That would hit miners and mission runners just as hard if not harder.


Yeah, going to second this. Removing alts from the game is just a generally bad idea.

Also clearly Reiisha has never heard of exchanging tags for sec status. This would actually impact gankers *less* than almost any other profession since sec status is actually pretty easy to buy back or grind back if you know what you're doing. It's even less costly if you don't bother popping pods, since that's a way larger sec status hit than just blowing up a ship.


As i said, i'm aware of this. Alts became 'the meta' very early on in the game's lifecycle, and all sorts of other mechanics have been added around the use of alts .

I'd say that alts are a very messy solution to a lot of problems the game has.

If mining and mission running is bad without alts, improve it so it isn't.

Personally i've always been against the tag thing for sec status anyway - It was a band-aid fix to a problem that never actually existed.

None of this takes away from the fact that alts allow you to circumvent a lot of mechanics and ignoring a lot of otherwise very effective and meaningful consequences. They shouldn't have been necessary for anything in EVE, but they have become a huge financial crutch for CCP.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Salvos Rhoska
#156 - 2017-02-25 16:58:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Starrakatt wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Its a very soft change. Wouldnt affect mission ship suicide ganking largely at all, as you are more concerned with the modules which are unscannable, rather than cargo contents. Wouldnt make suicide ganking impossible along trade lines either, just less certain of their profits.

There is a thing called a Ship Scanner that does exactly that (scan mods) and work on the same principle of that of a Cargo Scanner.

Also by your reasonning, just looking into someone's jettisoned cargo or wreck should trigger a Suspect Timer, as it is prying into someone's privacy...


A wreck is unoccupied, and a result of player action.
If the wreck is a result of legal engagement, its contents are available to its destroyer.

There is a difference between looking i to an u occupied wreck, and peeking into the cargo/module hold of an active occupied ship.

Jettisoned cargo still belongs to the owner (albeit perhaps that too, shouldnt).
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#157 - 2017-02-25 17:04:17 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

The change should happen, because it rationalizes the underlying mechanics.

Cargo scanning is an invasive action. You intrusively pry into the hold of another player.
This should not occur without a reciprocal cost. Currently, there is none.
Having a scanning ship on site, does not in and of itself constitute a cost, because the scanning ship is not currently implicated in any way. They can scan all the ships they want, intrude i to their holds, at no cost or risk.


So we should do the same with combat probes too then?

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Cargo-scanning is not mandatory for suicide ganking Its just a convenience to pick out lucrative targets.


How else are you going to know what the hauler is carrying to make the call on if it is profitable or not? Its fundamental to ganking.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

If cargo scanning issued a suspect flag, they can still continue scanning as many holds as they wish, unless so eone eliminates them.

We all know that cargo scanning ships are implict in the suicide gank operational system.
They are part of the suicide gank team effort, as much as the attack ships, and the loot pickup ships.
Th attack ships get rekt by CONCORD, the loot pickup teams go suspect.
So too should the cargo scanning elements go suspect.


You have yet to answer why ganking needs yet another nerf.

Ill answer your last question.

There are several reasons that rely on a few facts of life:

1 EvE is a game not a lifestyle
2 For every PvPr there are around 10 times more none PvPrs
3 Is classified
4 The wants of the many outweigh the pathalogical psychological hystereological needs of a few bullied nerds
5 Sometimes your ingame actions warrant a good stern real life talking to

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#158 - 2017-02-25 17:07:17 UTC
How stern? 'I will quit and send my dog after you'-stern?
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#159 - 2017-02-25 17:32:34 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
hystereological

Invented word detected

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#160 - 2017-02-25 17:50:22 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


1) Combat probes are not tthe same as cargo scanning.
They are furthermore entirely different skill trees.
Combat probes deliver information on location at great range.
Cargo scanning is a matter of kms.
Their function is unique and unlike the other.
Combat probes, especially in HS, are used for finding mission ships onsite, at great range.
Cargo scanning, in HS, is used almost exclusively for the purpose of identifying fat targets, onsite.
(And scanning ghost/relic/data cans)


Both are used in ganking, the same arguments you are using asast cargo scanners can be used on ship scanners and combat probes.



Salvos Rhoska wrote:

2) Blockade runners remain unscannable in my proposal, as they are now.
Zero change.


You missed my point, BR have been made less safe because of the unscannable change. People who keep on trying to nerf ganking always fail to see how they are making the game worse for themselves as the push for just one more nerf.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

3) Double packing, flooding cargo with trash, are ways of impairing data to a cargo scanner. But they are niot an issue of cargo scanners themselves.


They are a direct counter everyone can already use, there is no need to further nerf ganking. It simply isn't needed.