Fairplay proposal to DW2 gankers: attack but don't destroy ships

[insanephoton]

In theory, the extreme jump range explorers would be able to easily outrun any. chasing gank squad, then lose them in the vastness of the galaxy. In practice, expeditions like DW dawdle along at a leisurely pace have regular meetings which make them easy to follow. The minimum required range is within the capabilities of an engineered combat ship (especially since the Guardian FSD modules were introduced)

It could even be argued that the pursuing gank squad could potentially do more exploring than the explorers by dint of having to traverse more systems

As for the OP's suggestion, if I was a griefer I would gladly take up your invitation and may even bring a repair limpet along just to ensure that the 20% limit wasn't breached. Then I would enjoy your consternation at trying to fix things with all of your modules destroyed.

 

[Bigmaec]

In theory, the extreme jump range explorers would be able to easily outrun any. chasing gank squad, then lose them in the vastness of the galaxy. In practice, expeditions like DW dawdle along at a leisurely pace have regular meetings which make them easy to follow. The minimum required range is within the capabilities of an engineered combat ship (especially since the Guardian FSD modules were introduced)

It could even be argued that the pursuing gank squad could potentially do more exploring than the explorers by dint of having to traverse more systems

As for the OP's suggestion, if I was a griefer I would gladly take up your invitation and may even bring a repair limpet along just to ensure that the 20% limit wasn't breached. Then I would enjoy your consternation at trying to fix things with all of your modules destroyed.

You are at least reasonably safe with a high jump range against a wake scanner, provided you don't highwake to the nearest system but one at the edge of your jump range. That takes preparation.
And, of course, you have to survive the initial assault, which then leads back to having to fit a proper shield. So a higher jumprange is some sort of precaution against ganking, just a minor one.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Well for a start, if money had any meaning in ED, there'd be a risk from the start. As it is, we instinctively remove monetary drawbacks from consideration, because we know that earning back several million ("several" not even covering it for a true combat iCutter or whatever) is not even an irritation.

Even then, do you really believe you would be the only victims here? I suspect many of the "victims" are in 70+LY cardboard boxes, while the murderers are in combat vessels that took longer to reach a destination to murder someone than the explorer they killed. If you even survive the murder attempts, you wasted more of their time than you took to get there - and they didn't even get exploration data for it. If you killed them outright, they wasted more time than you took to get there, only to be wasted themselves.

Secondly, as much as you don't like to hear it, the drawbacks are somewhat managed by attitude. I think if the DW fleet arranged a PvP retinue to escort them, and said escort obliterated most of SDC or whatever gank squad it is these days...said gank squad would take to the forums to state how proud they are of the DW crew. Some players are open to all aspects of the game, and others expect the game to fit within their...expectations.

Hell, let's take this at face value - what "rewards" do the gankers get at all? They aren't being paid for this. They're simply getting involved in a social aspect of a social game, regardless of whether you approve of that social sect. If that doesn't appeal to you, why are you taking part in a social initiative, and in Open where all player attitudes are welcome?

For the record I am not that bothered tbh I just play in PG. Open is open and people should go in it eyes wide open. So long as players don't ask for features to be locked into open then I won't have an issue with them

But......... I will call horse manure when I believe I see it, and to me anyone claiming a murder hobo is facing the same risk as an explorer is .... Not being honest imo because there is no possible win scenario for the explorer only a "not lose"

That was my only response in this thread, nothing more

The equation is missing 1 half that we were told would be in.

 

[jasonbarron]

Which is an admission that exploration, requiring travel over long distances, is an investment in a person's play time and therefore a significant loss when he/she is removed from the game prematurely.

In the example we've been using, the pvpers have invested even more time than the explorers, so they've in all actuality taken on the most risk. The key difference is, the pvpers have taken a number of steps to prepare for said risks, unlike their counter parts.

 

[Autoculto]

I'm sure that the dg2 team will go for those rules 100%. But I doubt it'll work because one salvo is more than plenty to destroy 2 or 3 of these paper thin exploration builds. If they could control and only fire one multi cannon bullet you would possibly stand a chance of not popping lol.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

You really think murderhobos are the only one's out there with guns and armor?

No, although murderhobos will only die if they so wish, after all, defense>offense.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

If you see a frag cannon armed cutter with an interdictor in open you shouldn't let yourself get interdicted though...

Today we learned Mugur has never heard of damage falloff. What does he expect the Phantom to do? Not move?

 

[Marra Morgan]

Today we learned Mugur has never heard of damage falloff. What does he expect the Phantom to do? Not move?

But but but Coriolis says so!

 

[Lightspeed]

In the example we've been using, the pvpers have invested even more time than the explorers, so they've in all actuality taken on the most risk. The key difference is, the pvpers have taken a number of steps to prepare for said risks, unlike their counter parts.

Except, for the attacker, there is little to no risk of premature departure. The targets are not weapon rich.

 

[Bigmaec]

Today we learned Mugur has never heard of damage falloff. What does he expect the Phantom to do? Not move?

Considering many vids I have seen that's exactly what's happening. Running away in straight line against a Cutter masslocking you and being as fast as you

 

[BDelacroix]

Appealing to the better nature of a troll? Good luck with that. Only your pride gets you killed in open.

 

[AP Birdman]

Ok... I give up!

I honestly, cannot believe you thought this post was a good idea in the first place.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

But but but Coriolis says so!

Spreadsheet PvP babyyyyyyyyyyy

 

[StiTch]

For the record I am not that bothered tbh I just play in PG. Open is open and people should go in it eyes wide open. So long as players don't ask for features to be locked into open then I won't have an issue with them

But......... I will call horse manure when I believe I see it, and to me anyone claiming a murder hobo is facing the same risk as an explorer is .... Not being honest imo because there is no possible win scenario for the explorer only a "not lose"

That was my only response in this thread, nothing more

The equation is missing 1 half that we were told would be in.

Let's be real here, friend:

1) the ganker has no reward, which is one half of risk and reward.
2) the gankee in the majority of situations did not give one iota's consideration to survivability, which - let's be real - should be important if they are risking as much as you imply. Those jump range increases, those lightweight D-rated modules...they are not gonna make you survive. So in a galaxy touted, by FD no less, as cutthroat...why do you think it's acceptable to fly a cardboard box and survive 100% of the time?

Them nasty griffers simply accept the notion of offset. They spent more hours than the average explorer can conceive of engineering, and as "people" (not to strawman) like to forget in the C&P system they demanded, the PvP player actually risks all of that ganking. Build up more than a few kills, and that apex combat ship can be gone forever quite happily. The difference is that they understand risk, and will take measures to prevent the worst happening-and if the worst happens, accept it was part of their choice. Time and time again, unlike almost any other game, a large majority of ED players build a slow-moving cardboard box, have no idea how to pilot it, and then complain when the box gets squished.

It's easier now than ever to build something that jumps better than previously possible, often with 1k+MJ shields and perfectly fine thrust capability, that will escape an interdiction and go about its business having lost a minute or two game time. It takes hundreds of hours to create a ship that cannot reliably blow up a ship if the opponent knows how to escape, and gains nothing from stalking explorers.

 

[zarrazee]

OP. Take your pick. 1) There is no honour among gankers. 2) A leopard never changes its spots.

 

[Branithar]

Ganking... What’s the draw there? And why would someone fly thousands of light years just to gank unarmed or lightly armed explorers? If I were to fly thousands of light years from the bubble just to gank some people, I’d probably look back on how much time I spent and feel kind of yucky.

 

[Erasmus Boone]

Ah when irresistable lameness meets immovable naivety.

DG2 is fundementaly lame, however hard they try to dress it up they just get their kicks from kicking over sandcastles on the beach.
BUT its absurdly naive to have a paper ship in open at DW2 waypoints etc and not think your are likely to get ganked.

 

[Morbad]

In theory, the extreme jump range explorers would be able to easily outrun any. chasing gank squad, then lose them in the vastness of the galaxy. In practice, expeditions like DW dawdle along at a leisurely pace have regular meetings which make them easy to follow.

You are at least reasonably safe with a high jump range against a wake scanner, provided you don't highwake to the nearest system but one at the edge of your jump range. That takes preparation.

In practice, any ability to jump away at all means any competent CMDR can avoid being followed by anyone.

If my CMDR is able to high wake and expects anyone to care to follow, the only way they are going have a shot at encountering him is if they are already waiting in SC at the destination (only likely if there is an obvious escape system like the only one in range with a conveniently placed starport, which are systems to be avoided if one decides survival matters), cause as soon as he gets there, he's turning off thrusters to force an drop to normal space well before the FSD cooldown has ended and no low wake will be left if he's the only one in SC at the time. This is fast enough to counter someone who knows exactly what system was jumped to the instant the wake appears (such as in cases where there are only one or two convenient escape destinations, the defender isn't taking measures to conceal the final destination, and the attacker selects the same destination system immediately, if they don't already have it plotted), well before there has been time to scan it.

And, of course, you have to survive the initial assault, which then leads back to having to fit a proper shield. So a higher jumprange is some sort of precaution against ganking, just a minor one.

Surviving the initial assault is all that really matters.

No, although murderhobos will only die if they so wish, after all, defense>offense.

Don't need to be a 'murderhobo' to build a ship that can survive a few hits and have an escape plan ready.

 

[Bigmaec]

...cause as soon as he gets there, he's turning off thrusters to force an drop to normal space well before the FSD cooldown has ended and no low wake will be left if he's the only one in SC at the time.

Woah, nice tip, never thought about that. Learning something new everyday [up]

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Don't need to be a 'murderhobo' to build a ship that can survive a few hits and have an escape plan ready.

I never said otherwise.