These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

High sec GANKING
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#61 - 2014-06-06 15:04:02 UTC
If you stick tons of shiny crap in a subcap with less than 100k EHP you deserve what you get. Also there are these things called resistance plantings that make armor freighters much harder to gank without killing their cargo space. HTFU.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#62 - 2014-06-06 15:35:48 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
chaosgrimm wrote:


Carebear says ganking needs nerfed.

Ganker says carebears need risk.

Ganking is a low risk activity.


Only ganking isnt risk free is it?

We risk not killing the target

We risk being attacked by war targets

We risk being attacked by everyone when we are -10

We have a 50% chance of the items we are after being destroyed.

We risk being ganked ourselves.

And this is all before we get into the punishments for doing our activity.


Technically nothing is free isk. Miners buy ships, as do industrialists and mission runners. The only risk is the possibility of the isk not being worth the initial investment.
Gankers spend isk on their ships, the risk that comes into play is where or not the isk they spent was worth the gained isk / lolz afterwards

* "attacked by war targets" and "attacked at -10." Gankers control these. If these factors hold you back it is your own fault. Targets have no control over these.

* "not killing the target" If gankers didnt bring enough dps, that is the gankers fault and something the gankers control. They chose the target.

* "We risk being ganked ourselves." gankers 'risk' of being ganked is nowhere near the risk a target takes. The gank fleets ships are cheap and the value of the fleet is split between several ships.

* "We have a 50% chance of the items we are after being destroyed." lol The chance is per item and the chance of the gank not being profitable is not / doesnt need to be directly proportional to the chance of an item not dropping. This risk can be factored before the gank attempt is made. The target has a risk that they cant refuse to take unless they dont play the game / ever undock. The risk they take undocking is unknown, changes all the time, and they risk nearly 100% of their value for substantially smaller returns on their investment.


Gankers take very little risk....
Fragglewump
Dust514.
#63 - 2014-06-06 15:50:08 UTC
put it this way baltec if the risk was so high you would not be doing it. and ganking has its place as well it just needs to be policed better im not saying get rid of the idea of it.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#64 - 2014-06-06 15:50:42 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
chaosgrimm wrote:

so ur in it for large rewards w/ no risk.

Might i suggest a single player games with cheat code / console access. Some games you can even make the NPC drop whatever you want, and enable god mode, all those cool things. You can kill plenty of NPCs with high rewards and no risk.


That would be best for yourself seeing as how you do not like non-consensual combat in a game that has it as core gameplay.

lol i dont mind non consensual combat. It's not the combat that's the problem. It's the ease / risk on the ganker's end. This is essentially combat where the ganker gets to choose nearly all their fights, the ships they fight against, the fitting of those ships, the potential rewards of those fights, the difficultly level of the fight, whether or not the ship they fight against is capable of damaging them..., etc

Again, you may enjoy single player games, many times you can choose the level of difficulty and the reward plus they dont need to be proportional at all!!!
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#65 - 2014-06-06 15:52:03 UTC
chaosgrimm wrote:
* "not killing the target" If gankers didnt bring enough dps, that is the gankers fault and something the gankers control. They chose the target.

To be fair the gankers can't really know if the target has an OGB in the system and there is nothing they can do about it.

chaosgrimm wrote:
* "We risk being ganked ourselves." gankers 'risk' of being ganked is nowhere near the risk a target takes. The gank fleets ships are cheap and the value of the fleet is split between several ships.

If you feel that this is not a big enough risk you can always get into a catalyst or tornado and do something about it.

chaosgrimm wrote:
...The target has a risk that they cant refuse to take unless they dont play the game / ever undock. The risk they take undocking is unknown, changes all the time, and they risk nearly 100% of their value for substantially smaller returns on their investment.

This is not entirely true. There are a number of things a hauler can do to mitigate the risk of being ganked.

chaosgrimm wrote:
Gankers take very little risk....

Perhaps you should try ganking some of the gankers before you make blanket statements about parts of the game you have not yet yourself tried?
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#66 - 2014-06-06 15:53:26 UTC
chaosgrimm wrote:

gankers can counter all off these.
- tanked -> more dps
- warping -> bump / improve can res / corp spy or awoxer / etc
- lolwtffalcon -> requires engagement, offensive measures arent really an option
- warfare boosters -> the above
- logibros -> high alpha
- "instawarp" -> "instalock"
- Not using autopilot -> improve ganker QoL if a hauler uses it, but not a problem
- insta undocks -> bumps.


- tanked -> more dps
Yup
- warping -> bump / improve can res / corp spy or awoxer / etc
Daredevil with faction heated webs
- lolwtffalcon -> requires engagement, offensive measures arent really an option
Aren't an option? Thats your problem.
- warfare boosters -> the above
You aren't using them are you? It makes gankers use more and assuming they don't know it can easily fail for them costing them all and gaining nothing for them.
- logibros -> high alpha
High alpha means they have to use nados, guess what nados cost 2 times as much as freighter hull if its bulkhead fit
- "instawarp" -> "instalock"
Freighters can instawarp? If you want instawarp/cloak use a BR
- Not using autopilot -> improve ganker QoL if a hauler uses it, but not a problem
Confirming autopilot is a feature not a way of life, if you use it you deserve to get ganked.
- insta undocks -> bumps
Uhh no, instawarp means instawarp, nothing can tackle the right undock, and if it somehow does then just cancel warp and dock right back up.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2014-06-06 15:59:00 UTC
ganking is simply a cost of doing business in Eve, manage the risk and you have less costs due to ganking. If the costs you incur from being ganked are below those you will accept then you're doing fine, if they are higher you need to revisit you strategies for moving stuff around/mining/flying from place to place in expensive ships...
Llyona
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#68 - 2014-06-06 16:04:30 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
It ONLY takes 25 people to gank a freighter now.

Man can you imagine? It only takes 500 mil of fittings and ships or so.

Oh it also takes 6 hours and half of cumulative GCC timers all the time they have to wait x25 and 25 tags between them.
They must also be organized and there is no guarantee loot will drop and even if it does someone else can steal it or foil their plans.

Freighters were overbuffed, if you want more go play hello kitty online.


Boy do I have some bad news for you.

EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#69 - 2014-06-06 16:07:00 UTC  |  Edited by: chaosgrimm
double post.... pls ignore
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#70 - 2014-06-06 16:07:54 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

To be fair the gankers can't really know if the target has an OGB in the system and there is nothing they can do about it.

They still choose whether or not they engage the target. And the target is still only safe if the effect of OGB is > the offensive capabilities of the ganking fleet.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

If you feel that this is not a big enough risk you can always get into a catalyst or tornado and do something about it.

This really doesnt change anything. Why gank gankers when there are higher valued targets near around the ganking fleet? The value from killing them is low and i dont have anything against gankers per se.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

This is not entirely true. There are a number of things a hauler can do to mitigate the risk of being ganked.

The problem is that anything the hauler can do the gankers can counter.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

Perhaps you should try ganking some of the gankers before you make blanket statements about parts of the game you have not yet yourself tried?

lol
Fragglewump
Dust514.
#71 - 2014-06-06 16:09:54 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
[quote=chaosgrimm]

High alpha means they have to use nados, guess what nados cost 2 times as much as freighter hull if its bulkhead fit




http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23850773

or this

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23827690



so how much would of that gank set up cost ? 290 mill ? and like ive said a lot of times people dont do it for the isk most of the times tears and lolz are worth more then isk
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#72 - 2014-06-06 16:13:04 UTC
Fragglewump wrote:
put it this way baltec if the risk was so high you would not be doing it. and ganking has its place as well it just needs to be policed better im not saying get rid of the idea of it.


Its already the most nerfed and most punished activity in EVE.

No amount of nerfing ganking will ever change the fact that people do stupid things like fly untanked haulers with billions in the hold. Equally, no amount of nerfing is ever enough for the highsec bears.

CCP buffed HP on ships, bears celebrated the end of ganking, we adapted, the bears cried one more nerf.

CCP buffed Concord response times, bears celebrated the end of ganking, we adapted, the bears cried one more nerf.

CCP took away insurance payment on concorded ships? Bears celebrated the end of ganking, we adapted and the cries of one more nerf started again.

CCP rolled out the crimewatch changes, Bears celebrated the end of ganking, we adapted, the cries of one more nerf started again.

The list is almost endless, bears will continue to cry one more nerf until CCP ban PvP in high sec. The best part is if the bears simply used their noggins and fitted a tank, didn't fly AFK and didn't stuff their life savings in the hold then they aren't at risk.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#73 - 2014-06-06 16:14:32 UTC
Fragglewump wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
[quote=chaosgrimm]

High alpha means they have to use nados, guess what nados cost 2 times as much as freighter hull if its bulkhead fit




http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23850773

or this

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23827690



so how much would of that gank set up cost ? 290 mill ? and like ive said a lot of times people dont do it for the isk most of the times tears and lolz are worth more then isk


The answer to this is avoid Aufay, the code is running an event in that system.
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2014-06-06 16:17:39 UTC
chaosgrimm wrote:
They still choose whether or not they engage the target. And the target is still only safe if the effect of OGB is > the offensive capabilities of the ganking fleet.

Ah but they cannot factor the OGB into their decision to engage. So they either bring too many ships and sacrifice profit or they risk not killing the target.

chaosgrimm wrote:
This really doesnt change anything. Why gank gankers when there are higher valued targets near around the ganking fleet? The value from killing them is low and i dont have anything against gankers per se.

Sure it does. It adds additional risk to their decision making process. Why you ask? Why for that very purpose, and for the laughs.

chaosgrimm wrote:
The problem is that anything the hauler can do the gankers can counter.

Really? Do you have some examples for the many risk mitigation methods already mentioned in this thread?

chaosgrimm wrote:
lol

Indeed.
Michael Ignis Archangel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#75 - 2014-06-06 16:51:16 UTC
The larger the gank, the higher the risk and the higher rewards. Popping a barge is very often not at all profitable from an ISK perspective. It's also admittedly fairly low-risk.

This is fine, and balanced.

Freighter ganking is also fine, and balanced. 1v20 should go to the 20, almost every time. Multiplayer games should reward coordination. In an example I mentioned previously, if you bring 20bn in a freighter into Niarja escorted by a few Falcons, Basilisks, Guardians, and the standard webbing Atron... you'll probably be fine and anyone who attempts to gank you is probably -500m ISK, -x sec status, and -y epeen. More even if you catch a few criminal pods on the way out for lulz.

Fine, and balanced.

In reality, barring actually perfect alpha or outright fail-fitting, n vs n combat will probably go to the non-criminal in highsec. The lone wildebeest can and should always fall to the pride of lions.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#76 - 2014-06-06 16:53:59 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

Ah but they cannot factor the OGB into their decision to engage. So they either bring too many ships and sacrifice profit or they risk not killing the target.

Yes they can. They either bring more ships or decide not to engage. The target doesnt get those luxuries. This is PvP where you pick your opponent, their fit, their ability to fight back, etc

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

Sure it does. It adds additional risk to their decision making process. Why you ask? Why for that very purpose, and for the laughs.

...sigh no
If you believe that lolz and griefing is enough motivation, surely you assume the game would be relatively unchanged if ganking was not profitable.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

Really? Do you have some examples for the many risk mitigation methods already mentioned in this thread?

I gave some earlier, is there anything specifically?
At the same time, targets are expected to engage in risk mitigation vs potentially unknown and fluctuating chances of getting ganked; wherein, they take near 100% losses (save insurance) and 0% gains. Gankers have a much easier time determining the 'risk' that they are taking, can back out at just about any time, and stand to make substantial gains.
Iain Cariaba
#77 - 2014-06-06 16:57:02 UTC
Carebears wrote:
Whaaaa!!!

tl;dr: read this one

Ganking is already policed, that is what Concord is therd for. Just like the real world, the judicial system, of which the police is a part, is not there to prevent crime. The judicial system is only there to punish the law breaker.

Crime prevention falls on you. If you take that shortcut down the dark alleyway in the bad part of town you shouldn't be surprised when you get mugged. What you all seem to fail to realize is that anywhere outside a station is that dark alleyway.

Instead of asking for ganking to be prevented by CCP, try asking how to make yourself less of a gank target. In my 7+ years of carebearing around New Eden I've lost a total of 1 ship to ganking, an that was 6.5 years ago.

Here's a short list of what I've learned:

1. Probably the second most important... AUTOPILOT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND!!! Most hauler ganks I've seen happen or been part of have all been cause some pilot thinks there's nothing wrong with filling a hauler full of shineys and letting it fart along for 15km at less than 100m/s. Of course ganks also happen while warping off the gate, but any nullsec hauler can tell you how to deal with that.

2. Fit a damn tank. Every ship but a shuttle can now be made tankier, so use this ability. Don't whine over how 'fitting a tank takes away cargo space/mining amount.' This is intentional by CCP as you need to make a decision, survive or profit. Several times over the years I've had gankers hit me while mining, and after the first time, I've been still mining when Concord finally warped off. I'd much rather lose some m3/minute than a 250mil isk miner.

3. Seperate the load. Hauling several billion isk worth of stuff in an already expensive hauler is like walking into that dark alley wearing an Armani suit with a Rolex watch while flashing a roll of $100 bills. Yes it takes longer, but so does not taking the shortcut down that alley.

4. Get a scout. Flashy reds, war targets, -5 and -10 sec status people can all show up in local. Obviously jumping into these systems is bad, so knowing they are there helps.

5. Lastly, and most importantly, stop AFK hauling/mining. Not saying don't multibox, but pay attention to what you're doing on all clients. For miners this combined with item 2 will pretty much prevent ganks.

So again, the problem isn't the gankers, the problem is the ganked not learning how to not get ganked.
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#78 - 2014-06-06 17:11:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
chaosgrimm wrote:
Yes they can. They either bring more ships or decide not to engage. The target doesnt get those luxuries. This is PvP where you pick your opponent, their fit, their ability to fight back, etc

Since they cannot tell if an OGB is present. No, they can't.

chaosgrimm wrote:

...sigh no
If you believe that lolz and griefing is enough motivation, surely you assume the game would be relatively unchanged if ganking was not profitable.

So you don't think that lolz and griefing are enough motivation? Do you even play EVE?

chaosgrimm wrote:

I gave some earlier, is there anything specifically?

All of which were shot down. Please try again. Lets start with a cloaky tanked blockaid runner, or a Deep Space transport with over 100k EHP, or maybe a freighter with webbing support and insta undock bookmarks, or how about a falcon alt?

chaosgrimm wrote:

At the same time, targets are expected to engage in risk mitigation vs potentially unknown and fluctuating chances of getting ganked; wherein, they take near 100% losses (save insurance) and 0% gains. Gankers have a much easier time determining the 'risk' that they are taking, can back out at just about any time, and stand to make substantial gains.

Actually its not that hard to calculate your EHP and from that work out how much ISK it would cost to gank you and then adjust what you are carrying accordingly. So, working as intended. Maybe you should try null sec? Its much safer.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#79 - 2014-06-06 17:29:16 UTC
Fragglewump wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
[quote=chaosgrimm]

High alpha means they have to use nados, guess what nados cost 2 times as much as freighter hull if its bulkhead fit




http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23850773

or this

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23827690



so how much would of that gank set up cost ? 290 mill ? and like ive said a lot of times people dont do it for the isk most of the times tears and lolz are worth more then isk

First kill was 22 people and it cost 400-500 in ships and another 400 in tags, it was also in 0.5 and cmon 22 people?
I know for a fact it wasn't alts, if 22 people want you dead you will die, not to mention he was probably autopiloting because that's what code usually target.

As for the second kill it wasn't without tank, it was ANTITANKED. Cargos and nanos both reduce hull HP again he had it coming.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#80 - 2014-06-06 18:16:19 UTC  |  Edited by: chaosgrimm
@Antillie,
Ill respond to ur comments here but I think we might be on two different pages. I'm not saying the risk to indy is too high. I'm saying the risk for gankers is too low and predictable.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

Since they cannot tell if an OGB is present. No, they can't.

they get the final call.... they can decide to not to gank even not knowing ogb is present.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

So you don't think that lolz and griefing are enough motivation? Do you even play EVE?

then you should have no problem with a middle ground where ganking for profit is no longer possible, or the OP's suggestion?

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

All of which were shot down. Please try again. Lets start with a cloaky tanked blockaid runner, or a Deep Space transport with over 100k EHP, or maybe a freighter with webbing support and insta undock bookmarks, or how about a falcon alt?

Your solution to getting mugged is to get a lower paying job so that the muggers have less to steal. Gankers do not need to make such sacrifices, they can be more profitable by decreasing their upfront costs.

In all of these cases you are either trying to be proactive or defensive, and still ultimately dont decide your own fate.
Blockade Runner - instead of loosing isk via gank, lose ur isk via opportunity cost and terrible cargo
Prepatch Charon had ~180k ehp..... still ganked on a regular
webbing support doesnt always work, and its not as if the webber cant be ganked if the cargo is valuable enough.
falcon cant save you from an alpha, and you cant exactly be proactive with it. and as always, if the cargo is valuable enough, the falcon can be ganked.
Curious as to what ur solution is to mining? running away?
All of these can help ensure gank targets / help ensure a gank is successful. Gankers arnt helpless.

But the above doesnt address the problem here. This is the same problem that low / null sec ppl whine about. I havent been arguing that the risk for haulers / miners is too high. I believe that non consensual combat is fine. And the counters I list arent to show how helpless industrials are; rather, they are intended how capable gankers are. The problem is the risk to gankers is too low. They get to pick the terms of every engagement. They can potentially counter all attempts stop their gank. Their 'losses' are generally the target getting away before they setup / lock or a terribly unlucky drop rate.

Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:

Actually its not that hard to calculate your EHP and from that work out how much ISK it would cost to gank you and then adjust what you are carrying accordingly. So, working as intended. Maybe you should try null sec? Its much safer.

I was talking about risk assessment / management. Gankers can precalc the dps they can deal, the type of ships they should be able to kill, the potential losses from drop rate, etc. They make informed decisions about using more expensive or less expensive ships, ammo, etc to increase their profitability.
The industrial has no idea what their potential risk of getting ganked is because it changes all the time. The dont really get to make informed decisions about taking on more or less risk because they dont have sufficient ways of knowing their chance of losing their ship.