EVE General Discussion

Heh wormholes, good times

Dscan, dscan, dscan ...... combat probes : GTFO/move, in range and not parked at a POS: GTFO. Alternatively cloak up and tease them in local for giggles

There you go a wonderful and concise summary as to why every whine about “the risk vs. reward of freighter ganking is broken” is absolutely wrong. The problem isn’t the mechanics. The problem is not the gankers, they are just responding to incentives that the imprudent and foolish are providing.

It's cyclic. It's also polarized. It's always going to be one or the other crying.

Right now, it's the gankees that are angry, but there has certainly been months straight of threads filled with rage and promises to quit from the gankers. So I'm going to have to disagree with you. It's only about the mechanics. Every time they get tweaked, one side or the other has an advantage and the ones on the wrong side flood the forum with tears.

Oddly enough they all use exactly the same arguments when it's their turn on the bottom. And I must say, as a player unaffected in any way by high sec ganking, it has been a never ending source of amusement watching this over the years.

Mr Epeen

They would get caught by NPC police in every system. If they grouped up to move to a system they would slowly be whittled down by the time they get to a target. CCP could also just add more NPC police to the systems to respond. They would basically have to setup in one system at a time which would have the intended effect of cutting down suicide ganks to a large extent.

what part of selling ships, modules and ammo to the enemy makes you a target are you not getting?

what part of mining the belts another corp is depending on makes you are target are you not getting?

what part of owning pocos and taxing the shite out of people makes you a target are you not getting?

what part of taking members from other corps in the area makes you a target are you not getting ?

what part of there is no safe space are you not getting?

what part of once you undock you can be shot are you not getting?

what part of the type of people that want to be left alone to play as if it's a single player game and avoid interaction with the community are not wanted are you not getting?

you say sisi doesn't work for these type of people that want to be left alone, well no shite ! EVE is an mmorpg and you are not supposed to play it like it's a single player game. without other players to compete with EVE is boring, what makes EVE is the fact that other players make it what it is. they build everything in the game, they drive conflict.

these people you speak of, they bring nothing to the game but fantasies that lead to shiteposts like this where for some reason they believe if they post this shite enough times CCP is going to make EVE not EVE.

Funny how the gank-aligned think that "defeat" is still on the table when it's proven they are coddled. Defeat is just as meaningless as their "success".

But if they makes them feel better they can think that.

It's not the first time they tried to make this correlation. It's one of their bastion concepts. Though I did see someone once distract a gate camper with Ayn Rand. Overall AG are not a bunch of hippies nor are gankers John Galt.

I have tried for nearly 10 years to figure out a pattern of Eve behavior and RL political alignments or ideologies and no pattern has emerged.
(But then that has always been the case with gamers, and why angering gamers with poor ethics in game journalism is like poking a hornets nest)

Absolutely wrong again, at least something is constant here. You talk about players, while I try to tell you that it has nothing to do with the players but with the actual game mechanics centered around NPCs and resources. The risk part has to do with NPC defending your ship while the reward has to do with loot they drop and resources in the belts, planets etc.

Those things are static and that is why it is possible to balance it, that is where the term risk/reward is used.

Player interaction and emergent gameplay on the other hand is not static and that is why you can't use the term risk/reward there. It is in fact self-balancing since players will eventually adapt.

Still not clear?

Of course there are consequences to suicide ganking. That the rewards far outstrip the consequences is not the fault of the gankers, but the fault of the players who create those rewards. If players stopped creating those rewards, gankers would stop ganking (by and large, incidental ganking might still happen, but not the current for profit ganking…which has another term—piracy).

You are arguing with yourself.