How do you feel about ganckers?
- Thread starter husky of snow
- Start date
- Status
this post has kicked in at a good time.im in colonia now and just got the g5 fsd intridictor wide capture and long range .im not a ganger but should put me on equal footing if the need arises against them who gang me as i can return the compliment lol.
sounds like it,should start a club,its old rope realy its been around before a few times,but i enjoy reading it.what goes around comes around as they say.
This isn't gankers appreciation. The intent was to just have a conversation or debate in a civil mannor
What do I feel about gankers?
I only know some from watching the streams in the past i.e., Harry Potter. I thought he was quite funny and entertaining to watch in a way.
I generally think PvP people are just much more interesting human beings. PvE players are just dull and their streams are pain to watch even for a short moment.
In-game, back when I was still playing the main game, I had no issues with gankers. Hell I was getting interdicted a lot, but with properly outfitted ship dying was optional.
Just my two cents.
I only know some from watching the streams in the past i.e., Harry Potter. I thought he was quite funny and entertaining to watch in a way.
I generally think PvP people are just much more interesting human beings. PvE players are just dull and their streams are pain to watch even for a short moment.
In-game, back when I was still playing the main game, I had no issues with gankers. Hell I was getting interdicted a lot, but with properly outfitted ship dying was optional.
Just my two cents.
Title: I like to place both hands on their derriere and squeeze firmly.
Most of the problems stem from how easy it is just to clean your record. This is another of the Frontier Says things that made me lol "We don't want to stop gankers from missing out on gameplay by punishing them" (paraphrased).
The dichotomy that gets forgotten about here, which has been said a couple times now is something along the lines of
"Killing for bgs stuff is fine, but indiscriminate killing is not good"
Everyone affects the BGS in everything they do, that's the way the BGS is designed. So now everyone is a valid target. You can either:
Both are valid and in the rules of the game. FD also want player and NPC somewhat indistinct; murder is murder, whether it's a PC or NPC. PF bounties change that a little, but fundamentally there's no distinction the game can make between a bit of consensual PvP, non- consensual issue- motivated PvP, and ganking for lulz. The game just can't do intent.
There is a fix though, and people always balk at it.
Incentivise PvE crime significantly.
Inconsequential penalties for PvP crime are a side- effect of coupling them to PvE punishments[1]... and therefore the penalties need to match the incentive, which is (pardon the pun) criminally low. Even smuggling missions pay less than the same mission transporting the same goods, but not stolen. That's messed up.
PVE crime needs to be high risk, high reward.
I, personally, would love to get up in the Federation's grill, messing up their systems and attacking their people, maintaining a hostile rep with them constantly, if it earned me up to a billion credits a day[2].
In exchange I'd happily take on the consequences of:
And now you have a system that looks like how other games do C&P well. Heavily (but fairly) punished crimes which are recompensed by a commensurate reward, provided you're never caught. The important part here is that you only get these good reward rates when you put yourself at risk... this, high risk, high reward.
So how does that fix PvP? Well... you can still kill other players, and you'll be just as heavily punished. But the reward of PvP then depends on your mark. If they're just a shieldless hauler with no cargo, you're going to get a heavy, unavoidable penalty for no reward. Or, if that player has a hold full of LTDs[4], maybe you actually make a significant profit, even after handing yourself in.
Suddenly, players need to be much more discerning about who they kill and why. Of course, someone doing BGS kills will still be less discerning, but that's the cost of doing business (that, and murdering in your own turf actually works against your bgs interests, but anyway). My favourite BGS experience was seeking to flip a system to a new faction, and my path to doing this was a bunch of massacre civilian missions (back when they were more practical). I racked up a massive bounty with the controller, but when the system got flipped and my supported faction was in control, i had complete freedom to move with no threat because the former controllers no longer had jurisdiction. That was a great feeling.
So yeah... stopping ganking through opt-in flags and such for a game like ED is a bad move. Instead, significantly increase PvE crime rewards, allowing a commensurate ramp up for crime punishments, allowing PvE crime to fill the usual role of a high risk, high reward activity... and it forces PvP gankers to be more discerning.
[1] this is a design choice by FD, which is why i don't think decoupling is a solution (it wouldn't be anyway)
[2] notwithstanding the usual considerations of scaling, ship performance, player ability etc
[3] this needs a correction to notoriety to be superpower- specific.
[4] of course, we know it would be very difficult to collect the entire hold of a T9 full of LTDs, and murder doesn't need to come into it in current mechanics. An overhaul there would be needed.
"Killing for bgs stuff is fine, but indiscriminate killing is not good"
Everyone affects the BGS in everything they do, that's the way the BGS is designed. So now everyone is a valid target. You can either:
- try and monitor what people are doing and determine whether to destroy them or not; or
- just destroy everything you see, and know things are only being done by allies.
Both are valid and in the rules of the game. FD also want player and NPC somewhat indistinct; murder is murder, whether it's a PC or NPC. PF bounties change that a little, but fundamentally there's no distinction the game can make between a bit of consensual PvP, non- consensual issue- motivated PvP, and ganking for lulz. The game just can't do intent.
There is a fix though, and people always balk at it.
Incentivise PvE crime significantly.
Inconsequential penalties for PvP crime are a side- effect of coupling them to PvE punishments[1]... and therefore the penalties need to match the incentive, which is (pardon the pun) criminally low. Even smuggling missions pay less than the same mission transporting the same goods, but not stolen. That's messed up.
PVE crime needs to be high risk, high reward.
I, personally, would love to get up in the Federation's grill, messing up their systems and attacking their people, maintaining a hostile rep with them constantly, if it earned me up to a billion credits a day[2].
In exchange I'd happily take on the consequences of:
- Never being allowed in a federal station again
- being kill-on- sight in federal jurisdictions[3]
- the only way out is if I'm destroyed in federal space, or hand myself in, which results in paying back every credit i earned through these crimes (maybe more?)
And now you have a system that looks like how other games do C&P well. Heavily (but fairly) punished crimes which are recompensed by a commensurate reward, provided you're never caught. The important part here is that you only get these good reward rates when you put yourself at risk... this, high risk, high reward.
So how does that fix PvP? Well... you can still kill other players, and you'll be just as heavily punished. But the reward of PvP then depends on your mark. If they're just a shieldless hauler with no cargo, you're going to get a heavy, unavoidable penalty for no reward. Or, if that player has a hold full of LTDs[4], maybe you actually make a significant profit, even after handing yourself in.
Suddenly, players need to be much more discerning about who they kill and why. Of course, someone doing BGS kills will still be less discerning, but that's the cost of doing business (that, and murdering in your own turf actually works against your bgs interests, but anyway). My favourite BGS experience was seeking to flip a system to a new faction, and my path to doing this was a bunch of massacre civilian missions (back when they were more practical). I racked up a massive bounty with the controller, but when the system got flipped and my supported faction was in control, i had complete freedom to move with no threat because the former controllers no longer had jurisdiction. That was a great feeling.
So yeah... stopping ganking through opt-in flags and such for a game like ED is a bad move. Instead, significantly increase PvE crime rewards, allowing a commensurate ramp up for crime punishments, allowing PvE crime to fill the usual role of a high risk, high reward activity... and it forces PvP gankers to be more discerning.
In EVE, the high security systems have never been about protecting players, only about imposing punishment. If you attack another player in high security space, CONCORD show up and destroy you. It's actually against the TOS to evade this.
But that takes long enough for a small group of players, or a single, well equipped player to destroy the target and drop loot. Enter suicide ganking.
A bunch of assault frigates can take down a freighter, but the cost of the fittings and ship insurance/gap puts a minimum bar on what you want to hit if you want to turn a profit. So they'll ignore most, and hit only the naive player hauling things worth millions of billions in an unarmed, unprotected hauler. They need to be discerning.
Of course, kills for the lulz (empty freighters, shuttles etc) still happen, and the perps lose a decent whack of money/fittings for it. But nonetheless, the penalty is high, and provided the victim wasn't doing something really dumb like flying uninsured or with a rare/ unique module fitted, everything's good. And, it can still be avoided. Covert transports/ cloaking devices are a thing tanking your transporter too, right up to jump freighters. It's up to the player as to how much risk they take on board.
But that takes long enough for a small group of players, or a single, well equipped player to destroy the target and drop loot. Enter suicide ganking.
A bunch of assault frigates can take down a freighter, but the cost of the fittings and ship insurance/gap puts a minimum bar on what you want to hit if you want to turn a profit. So they'll ignore most, and hit only the naive player hauling things worth millions of billions in an unarmed, unprotected hauler. They need to be discerning.
Of course, kills for the lulz (empty freighters, shuttles etc) still happen, and the perps lose a decent whack of money/fittings for it. But nonetheless, the penalty is high, and provided the victim wasn't doing something really dumb like flying uninsured or with a rare/ unique module fitted, everything's good. And, it can still be avoided. Covert transports/ cloaking devices are a thing tanking your transporter too, right up to jump freighters. It's up to the player as to how much risk they take on board.
[1] this is a design choice by FD, which is why i don't think decoupling is a solution (it wouldn't be anyway)
[2] notwithstanding the usual considerations of scaling, ship performance, player ability etc
[3] this needs a correction to notoriety to be superpower- specific.
[4] of course, we know it would be very difficult to collect the entire hold of a T9 full of LTDs, and murder doesn't need to come into it in current mechanics. An overhaul there would be needed.
Reddit, discord, these forums... there's a whole subsection dedicated to it:
Groups, Squadrons, and Factions
Looking for a group or squadron to join? Check out this forum. Feel free to advertise your squadron and/or groups here!
Personally, i don't play games to make friends and socialise. I play games to... play games. If it's with others, it's colleagues or friends, or a game specifically designed for group PvE without PvP (e.g guild wars 2, excluding WvW)
I also find unwritten social expectations when playing a game to be way more toxic than gankers[1]. I've never had a report against me for things I've done in a game sustained, but it's happened often and in various games... i play by the rules so there's never an issue... but because I've slighted someone somehow, I'm subject to a bunch of abuse which is definitely against the rules.
In- game memorials/tributes are a great source of this... why anyone would get such a thing done for an interactable object is beyond understanding.
Me: <captures or destroys a thing>
Someone: THAT WAS A TRIBUTE TO MY DEAD CATS PET ROCK! GIVE IT BACK NOW!
Me: No.. capture it back if you want though.
Someone: you're a ** I'll * report you.
Me: <screenshot>
Arbiter: apparently you're harassing someone?
Me: <shows screenshot>
Arbiter: oh. <punishes Someone>
<a week or so later>
Someone: i hate you, I'm going to get everyone to attack you and get it back
Me: cool. Do it.
Option 1: literally nothing happens
Option 2: they actually conquer it back
Me: gg
Them: die in a fire.
Such nice people...
Someone: THAT WAS A TRIBUTE TO MY DEAD CATS PET ROCK! GIVE IT BACK NOW!
Me: No.. capture it back if you want though.
Someone: you're a ** I'll * report you.
Me: <screenshot>
Arbiter: apparently you're harassing someone?
Me: <shows screenshot>
Arbiter: oh. <punishes Someone>
<a week or so later>
Someone: i hate you, I'm going to get everyone to attack you and get it back
Me: cool. Do it.
Option 1: literally nothing happens
Option 2: they actually conquer it back
Me: gg
Them: die in a fire.
Such nice people...
It's like participating in a karate sparring match and having someone get upset at you for punching them in an unorthodox but legal technique in the head because "I'm here for mastery of the technique and just want to do my kata".. well... why did you come to a sparring match?
[1] experssly within the rules here, no cheating or verbal harassment etc.. causing another player to lose credits is not harassment.
Last edited:
And the second option is foolish if you're trying to "defend" a controlling faction, because the second option is functionally identical to attacking the controlling faction via PvP. The second option basically boils down to "I'll greatly undermine my own efforts on the slight chance these strangers aren't working for the faction I support. Which, if I'd done my job properly, they'll be working for in the first place, making my own efforts easier."
The game (and many of the long time players it seems) equate time sink with difficulty. The game put a 20 hour time sink on notoriety. For a group of players who consider staring contests and stay awake ability to be a sign of hard core gaming, that's about as good as it gets. I guess they could put a 40 hour time sink.
No, the issue isn't how easy it is to clean your record. The issue is just how worthless it is to be notorious. We've discussed this ad nauseum but FDev has created a nanny state in the game, one that holds your hand (you cannot lose bounties or bonds, you never die, you can borrow money to rebuy, piracy is all but dead, even NPCs won't attack as wings most of the time) and punishes players who want to be on the wrong side of the law by removing game content and not adding any alternatives. Avoiding notoriety is basically avoiding the time sink to remove it because you can fly around notorious forever. You turn yourself in and you can trade and take missions again, still notorious. Murder affects you more by the annoying splash text (that your ship would never show IRL) than anything else in the game. I do it sometimes in hopes of getting some action but it almost never materializes. When you leave a settlement having killed everyone there, then you refuel and sell the bounties at the landing pad OF THAT SETTLEMENT, that tells you all you need to know about it.
Last edited:
C&P has always been back to front by creating a system that rewards those who know how to manage and mitigate the consequence of crime. This, indirectly, punishes those who accidentally or unintentionally commit a crime (and otherwise lead clean lives) the most (because it's a massive inconvenience, especially if managing your criminal record isn't something you do often), and serves as no deterrent for career criminals (because they are essentially able to stay clean constantly). The fact having a superpower rep of Hostile does nothing at all[1] when in that superpower's systems kinda speaks to it all.
For it to work properly, a C&P system needs to be easily escapable for a one-off/accidental criminal (at the cost of an equivalent sum to the damage caused, but in a much easier way), but career suicide for a committed criminal to do. Notoriety and bounties need to be something a career criminal does not mitigate, otherwise the rewards of their crime are undone (resulting in a net negative position)... but to have that, there needs to be benefit associated with that.
Superpower-based notoriety means, if you were say, notorious in Federal space, you might get paid significantly more by a motivated party to go into Federal space and terrorize their shipping lanes, because "The scourge of the Federation" wracking the system is far more demoralizing to the local population than "joe bloggs who accidentally skimmed a mining ship with a laser when fighting some pirates", but equally attracts more powerful authority vessels. High(er) risk, high(er) reward.
In short; undoing the effects of crime should be very straightforward to anyone; give back what you gained, and maybe some more. For someone whose earnings are from lawful activity, this shouldn't hurt much. For someone whose built their life on crime, that should be devastating... with the challenge being not getting caught (y'know, like how crime normally works). Right now, crime doesn't give much at all.
[1] Incidentally, it's best to have Hostile Superpower rep to the minor faction superpowers you are allied with. Superpower rep applies a scalar modifier to rep gains and losses.
So if you're allied to the Federation, and allied to a Federal faction, and fail a mission, you'll probably drop to friendly, but succeeding a single mission will bump that back again. But if you're hostile-superpower, you would need to fail around 5 or 6 missions before dropping to Friendly. You'd need to do as many to get that back, but it's the rep bracket that matters.... and so allows for more mistakes. Quite bizzarre.
superpower bounties still being busted in odyssey speaks volumes about how much the devs actually expect people to do crime in game - and they're probably not even entirely wrong given how difficult it is to get confirmations on the tracker for anything relating to criminal activity.
Unpopular because it's bugged, and because it's unpopular it's not a priority for bugfixes. Love it.
Story of everything that's not a FOTM farming mechanism. It's why rebalancing the economy is so important too... but let's not go down that path...
It's a bit like the Thargoid stuff... nobody cared about tissue sampling til tissue sampling became important... then FD kinda did some handwavium and turned a bug into a "feature" (and start introducing a new sampling mechanic that doesn't have this bug...) :/ Then you started to need more and more utility modules to do various things with the goids, which upset people with pure AX fits... meanwhile both my AX and AH (I guess?) fits all feature these bells and whistles on the vain hope they were needed one day... so flipping that to the various AX-specific variants hasn't been disruptive at all.
Then there was the smuggling "stolen" price debuff error that went on way too long... but because even fixed smuggling doesn't turn the cash like hauling missions or typical bulk trade... who cares!
And... getting a bit OT... but I need to slip this one in...
Where do i start, there is no difference between the two, no difference in skill, no difference in attitude, its just different playstyles.
In my time i played at very high rank PvP in games like WOW and ESO and organised some of the 'World first' raids in Everquest.
Folks need to stop with this 'PvP' folks are better because you make yourselves look silly.
Which was harder? learning skills and combinations/meta to destroy others in PvP or organise, lead and hold together 40/80 man raids in Everquest over days/nights through SSRA, POP and Time in Everquest?
There is literally no comparison EQ was way harder than anything i have ever done or achieved in PvP and i was both a Grand Overlord and one of the first Emperors in ESO before faction rigging was a thing.
Either way PvP/PvE we are still the same person, i make no distinction in attitude or skill, its just a playstyle.
O7
You mean the fact that paying them off at IF requires a relog to register the fact in the UI? Noticed that the first time in 3000 hours of playing yesterday after a spree of surface scan/power failure/data aquisition missions
No wonder these bugs go unfixed; 99% of players probably never get a superpower bounty. At While I generally agree with you, I think in Elite from purely technical skill point of view PvP is the highest form of combat skill since Elite is more like Battlefield, Unreal Tournament, Counter-Strike, Il-2 or DCS where it's the player skill that matters, not their character's level or what in-game abilities/perks they invested in. Of course there is the more esoteric skillset of situation analysis, strategising and organizing player groups in BGS/PP/Thargoid war, but that's more of a metagaming skillset.
But as raw game mechanics go, PvP is the most difficult activity in Elite simply due to the fact that real people don't follow a rigid script when fighting. Pirate lords or Thargoid Hydras don't really throw you curveballs, they follow the script and the difficulty is in learning the moves and doing the "dance" perfectly without missing a beat, just like Souls-like boss fights. Humans on the other hand are full of surprises and every human has different reaction times, hand-eye coordination, ability to learn and become better and other variables that makes no two fights the same.
I say this as someone who's 99.9% PvE, but has had PvP encounters (with only two wins to my name, mind you, and the second one was a one-hit kill of a shieldless unengineered Viper MKIV in a CZ, so it doesn't really count) and who enjoys watching high-level PvP fight videos and learning from PvP tutorials—it makes me a better PvE pilot, too.
Not just that, it's not just a visual bug!You mean the fact that paying them off at IF requires a relog to register the fact in the UI? Noticed that the first time in 3000 hours of playing yesterday after a spree of surface scan/power failure/data aquisition missionsworstbest they get a small 800 cr bounty if a pirate assassination mission requires them to scan a surface installation data link.
Superpower bounties have a hidden counter in the background that determines when you've done enough crimes against that superpower to justify a bounty - it's supposed to only give you one if you have a lot of active bounties across multiple factions of that superpower - which happens fairly often to me since one of the things I tend to do a lot of for BGS work is surface/settlement scan missions, which tends to rack up a ton of minor bounties with a bunch of factions around whatever system I'm working in.
But part of the thing that broke with odyssey, along with the bug you mentioned, is that counter no longer gets reset like it should. So the next bountyable crime you commit against any faction of that power? Boom. 10k instant superpower bounty. That after you clear it, will be back again the instant you commit another crime.
And no, getting KWS'd and killed by another player doesn't fix it either. Nor handing yourself in.
The only way I used to be able to reset the counter was by switching to horizons and clearing my bounties there, but that's not an option after the legacy split since horizons 4.0 has the same problem.
That's good to know, because I do enjoy doing those surface scan missions occasionally. Though the challenge was to get in and out quickly enough not to get a bounty, but that isn't always possible.
Speaking of which, do you have a link to the bug report? I think I have a free vote at this time.
- Status