These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#361 - 2014-06-12 16:43:24 UTC
"the empires are losing their grasp on power, and as our age begins to dawn they will learn to fear us"

Does this sound like anything at all?

From what I'm seeing the empires are gaining their grasp on power through means of EHP buffs and and flat out ganker nerfing.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#362 - 2014-06-12 17:43:03 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:


You are so fixated on the "12 people" that you completely shut out any other though about the matter m0o; for instance, thinking about that the concept of shutting down regions again can be made workable again. It does not matter if it's possible with 12 or 200, it's the concept behind that matters and that it can be employed in High sec in a way it is not as easily employable in Low sec and 00 sec because of the very well known features of these areas. But please keep on denying the reality and disagree, it's your right to do that.

You, as so many other people, are also so fixated about changing High sec that you seemingly completely shut off any thought process about the other areas of the game, which are in a much more dire need of change. But please, in all sandbox fashion, keep on trying to make High sec as terrible as Low sec and 00 sec are. Lowering the standards is also a way to improve a machine.


The only people fighting for change are the nerf ganking brigade.

Now the reality is that we could throw everything we have in the CFC at high sec and we would fail to blocade a highsec region. It is impossible to do and has been for a very long time.
Iain Cariaba
#363 - 2014-06-12 17:52:42 UTC
I suggest all the nullsec coalitions declare truce for one week and have a 'Burn Highsec' event. Burn every freighter that undocks for a week and maybe the carebears will learn how to not get ganked.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#364 - 2014-06-12 18:06:15 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
I suggest all the nullsec coalitions declare truce for one week and have a 'Burn Highsec' event. Burn every freighter that undocks for a week and maybe the carebears will learn how to not get ganked.


Wishful thinking, that's not going to change anything.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:

You, as so many other people, are also so fixated about changing High sec that you seemingly completely shut off any thought process about the other areas of the game, which are in a much more dire need of change. But please, in all sandbox fashion, keep on trying to make High sec as terrible as Low sec and 00 sec are. Lowering the standards is also a way to improve a machine.


And then comes the part where half of the problems of the other regions of space, are because highsec is too competitive, in safety, in personal income, and until the next patch, manufacturing capability too.

CCP, fortunately for the future of the game, has finally realized that the stranglehold highsec has on the rest of the game is unhealthy for everyone.


You mean the stranglehold that you imposed on you yourself? It can be easier to mine, make money and produce in High sec than in 00 sec or Low sec, but that's only the case for as long as there is demand in High sec. Decreasing that demand by living in your home would do a great deal more to draw people out of there into the more dangerous space than any ganking can ever achieve.

But here I am, repeating myself yet again.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#365 - 2014-06-12 18:10:42 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

You mean the stranglehold that you imposed on you yourself? It can be easier to mine, make money and produce in High sec than in 00 sec or Low sec, but that's only the case for as long as there is demand in High sec. Decreasing that demand by living in your home would do a great deal more to draw people out of there into the more dangerous space than any ganking can ever achieve.

But here I am, repeating myself yet again.



Yeah, just wanting hard enough can totally make manufacturing anywhere but highsec viable. Roll

Heck, even CCP recognized that needed to be changed, railing against it now is just pointless. Turns out, near total safety is really valuable. Who'd have thunk it?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

unidenify
Deaf Armada
#366 - 2014-06-12 18:29:30 UTC
I am aware that my ship will always be in threat by ganker, but I want to know math to make my ship appear to least desired target to gank.

I remember there are number for 10 million isk per EHP based on sec rating, and stuff.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#367 - 2014-06-12 18:31:05 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

You mean the stranglehold that you imposed on you yourself? It can be easier to mine, make money and produce in High sec than in 00 sec or Low sec, but that's only the case for as long as there is demand in High sec. Decreasing that demand by living in your home would do a great deal more to draw people out of there into the more dangerous space than any ganking can ever achieve.

But here I am, repeating myself yet again.



Yeah, just wanting hard enough can totally make manufacturing anywhere but highsec viable. Roll

Heck, even CCP recognized that needed to be changed, railing against it now is just pointless. Turns out, near total safety is really valuable. Who'd have thunk it?


I am not disagreeing on that the industry in 00 used to be horrible, but everyone accepted it and benefited from it. If people would have tried harder to live in their home, these changes would at least have come a lot earlier or even better, would have never persisted that long and were rectified right from the start. Making 00 station so much worse than NPC station was a terrible implementation, but no one ever really pressed for a change to happen earlier. The vast majority just accepted this. Of course, talking about it in hindsight is always easy (Roll), but I am certain that - if people had not accepted this state - EVE would look very different today. More like it should look, according to CCP's vision.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#368 - 2014-06-12 18:40:21 UTC
So, you think people should just deal with an incredibly under par situation, and hope CCP notices?

You're kidding, right? Should people just fly the goddamn Hyperion, no matter how much it sucks, just to make a point about it?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#369 - 2014-06-12 20:14:12 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

You mean the stranglehold that you imposed on you yourself? It can be easier to mine, make money and produce in High sec than in 00 sec or Low sec, but that's only the case for as long as there is demand in High sec. Decreasing that demand by living in your home would do a great deal more to draw people out of there into the more dangerous space than any ganking can ever achieve.

But here I am, repeating myself yet again.



Yeah, just wanting hard enough can totally make manufacturing anywhere but highsec viable. Roll

Heck, even CCP recognized that needed to be changed, railing against it now is just pointless. Turns out, near total safety is really valuable. Who'd have thunk it?


I am not disagreeing on that the industry in 00 used to be horrible, but everyone accepted it and benefited from it. If people would have tried harder to live in their home, these changes would at least have come a lot earlier or even better, would have never persisted that long and were rectified right from the start. Making 00 station so much worse than NPC station was a terrible implementation, but no one ever really pressed for a change to happen earlier. The vast majority just accepted this. Of course, talking about it in hindsight is always easy (Roll), but I am certain that - if people had not accepted this state - EVE would look very different today. More like it should look, according to CCP's vision.


We have been pushing CCP to make null space worth owning for over a decade. Every time the highsec bears screamed blue murder at the thought of high sec not having the best rewards. They are still trying to stop CCP from fixing risk vs reward.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#370 - 2014-06-12 20:54:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

I am not disagreeing on that the industry in 00 used to be horrible, but everyone accepted it and benefited from it. If people would have tried harder to live in their home, these changes would at least have come a lot earlier or even better, would have never persisted that long and were rectified right from the start. Making 00 station so much worse than NPC station was a terrible implementation, but no one ever really pressed for a change to happen earlier. The vast majority just accepted this. Of course, talking about it in hindsight is always easy (Roll), but I am certain that - if people had not accepted this state - EVE would look very different today. More like it should look, according to CCP's vision.


We have been pushing CCP to make null space worth owning for over a decade. Every time the highsec bears screamed blue murder at the thought of high sec not having the best rewards. They are still trying to stop CCP from fixing risk vs reward.


That's what they do now (as in the last 2 years), because it has become habit to have that for years. As said, that should have been done right at the start. But then there are people like Mittani and other similarly minded people.

--

Kaarous Aldurald , please get some fresh air.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#371 - 2014-06-12 20:55:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
We have been pushing CCP to make null space worth owning for over a decade. Every time the highsec bears screamed blue murder at the thought of high sec not having the best rewards. They are still trying to stop CCP from fixing risk vs reward.

Moving L5 missions to NPC null, L4 mission to low, and moving 3/4 of the ore, ice, and research/manufacturing capacity in hisec to low and null would do so much good for the game tbh.
Iain Cariaba
#372 - 2014-06-12 21:28:14 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
But then there are people like Mittani and other similarly minded people.

As The Mittani is one of the most powerful players in the game, I'd have to say he knows what he's talking about.
Michael Lafleur
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#373 - 2014-06-12 21:52:45 UTC
You have to adapt to changement,

If null sec change, than it changes, if high sec change than it changes,

If Freighters had their cargo capacity reduced by over half, so be it

But people need time to adapt, and it usually take time,

Meaning in the end, you still complain about everything that you don't like ( your still human ) and won't ever like but you modified your gameplay to fit the new changes
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#374 - 2014-06-13 00:44:13 UTC
Michael Lafleur wrote:
You have to adapt to changement,

If null sec change, than it changes, if high sec change than it changes,

If Freighters had their cargo capacity reduced by over half, so be it

But people need time to adapt, and it usually take time,

Meaning in the end, you still complain about everything that you don't like ( your still human ) and won't ever like but you modified your gameplay to fit the new changes

By your logic if highsec had concord removed you would have to adapt to change.

If concord is removed then so be it.

But people need time to adapt, and it usually take time.

Right? Because stupid changes should just stay and we adapt. What?

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Michael Lafleur
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#375 - 2014-06-13 01:28:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Lafleur
would you adapt to the change ?
in your case of CONCORD removal, i think :

you would show your disapprobation (or maybe in your case approbation) on the forum, be killed a few times than you would find a way to survive in this new environment, because if your getting killed, it is that someone is surviving ...
but this is not the subject !

You have to find how to survive to whatever cause you problem, cause if you don't, you will probably stop playing, not surviving ( very frequently the same way ) is not fun, its like playing a game you always lose. Try playing Mortal Combat with a friend that is at least 2 times better than you, you rapidly get tired of losing.

you have to win sometime, and to my eye, it is impossible to win against gankers in high sec, ( returning on this again, but its the post subject ... ). You can make it so its a draw => tanking your ship so your not targeted, thus losing profit or you can lose => fitting module that reduce your EHP and making no profit of dying. To counter gankers, you would have to get a group of friend that would like to gank gankers, and since you're new to gaking, you probably have no idea how to catch them. Even if you do know that, its pure lose, since you cannot make a profit at ganking destroying a Catalyst, its 1 for 1.

prove me wrong, tell me a way to kill a group of gankers, so they lose more than you do when you kill them, oh wait, this way, they both lose , find me a way so you can kill a group of gankers and make a profit ... a decent profit, not 1m isk at a time
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#376 - 2014-06-13 01:51:45 UTC
Michael Lafleur wrote:

prove me wrong, tell me a way to kill a group of gankers, so they lose more than you do when you kill them, oh wait, this way, they both lose , find me a way so you can kill a group of gankers and make a profit ... a decent profit, not 1m isk at a time


You're not thinking about the problem the right way, I'll tell you that straight up.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#377 - 2014-06-13 02:26:35 UTC
Michael Lafleur wrote:
would you adapt to the change ?
in your case of CONCORD removal, i think :

you would show your disapprobation (or maybe in your case approbation) on the forum, be killed a few times than you would find a way to survive in this new environment, because if your getting killed, it is that someone is surviving ...
but this is not the subject !

You have to find how to survive to whatever cause you problem, cause if you don't, you will probably stop playing, not surviving ( very frequently the same way ) is not fun, its like playing a game you always lose. Try playing Mortal Combat with a friend that is at least 2 times better than you, you rapidly get tired of losing.

you have to win sometime, and to my eye, it is impossible to win against gankers in high sec, ( returning on this again, but its the post subject ... ). You can make it so its a draw => tanking your ship so your not targeted, thus losing profit or you can lose => fitting module that reduce your EHP and making no profit of dying. To counter gankers, you would have to get a group of friend that would like to gank gankers, and since you're new to gaking, you probably have no idea how to catch them. Even if you do know that, its pure lose, since you cannot make a profit at ganking destroying a Catalyst, its 1 for 1.

prove me wrong, tell me a way to kill a group of gankers, so they lose more than you do when you kill them, oh wait, this way, they both lose , find me a way so you can kill a group of gankers and make a profit ... a decent profit, not 1m isk at a time


Gank their talos with a cat. Steal the loot drop. Wardec them and camp the gates in the system they are operating.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#378 - 2014-06-13 02:29:11 UTC
Michael Lafleur wrote:
You have to find how to survive to whatever cause you problem, cause if you don't, you will probably stop playing, not surviving ( very frequently the same way ) is not fun, its like playing a game you always lose. Try playing Mortal Combat with a friend that is at least 2 times better than you, you rapidly get tired of losing.

I would. Then I ask my friend what I am doing wrong and/or any helpful tips for getting better. And then I would keep fighting him/her until I do win.

Then I would practice later on to prepare for the next match. Because NO ONE beats me!!! *grinds teeth*

Michael Lafleur wrote:
to my eye, it is impossible to win against gankers in high sec...

...

prove me wrong, tell me a way to kill a group of gankers

If you do not find yourself in a position where you will be ganked then congratulations... you just won against gankers.

Not all victories are gained through direct confrontation. Sometimes avoiding a confrontation in the first place is a victory in its own right. You do not have to "kill a bunch of gankers" to "win."

Yes... that is an abstract concept, I know.


Here is the list of solutions to being ganked:

- Scout: someone runs a D-scan 1 system ahead of you. If he/she sees something "unusual" at a gate, dock up or find a safespot.

- Webbing Assist: (this is my favorite) All you need is ONE GUY in a Hyena (Tech 2 Ewar frigate) apply 2 webs as soon as the freighter initiates warp. If done right, the freighter warps off in less than 5 seconds. That is not enough time for anything to bump, warp to, or get in firing range of the freighter.
NOTE: We use this for our low-sec freighter runs all the time. We have yet to lose anything.

- ECM Burst: have someone in a Griffin run into the pack of gankers right as they are landing on the freighter. Yes, this person will probably die to CONCORD doing this... but it is only one guy. And the ECM Burst will more than likely jam SOME of the gankers... meaning there will not be enough DPS to finish the job.

- Warfare links: Similar to a scout... except more lazy as you do not have to actively do anything. Gankers will have no idea whether you have one in tow or not... throwing off any calculations they make and potentially botching the gank attempt before it even starts.
NOTE: on average, Warfare links add about 40 to 50 thousand EHP... that is 10 to 15 additional T1-fit gank Catalysts or 6 to 10 T2-fit gank Catalysts (in a 0.6 system).

- Scanner Spam: in addition to your regular cargo, toss in little amounts of small crap. Tobacco, Spirits, Exotic Dancers, etc. If anyone tries to cargo scan you, they will come up with a LONG list stuff they will not want. And remember that the cargo scanner is not entirely accurate. It will usually report only 80% of what is in a ship. Try sifting through a 100 item list of random stuff multiple times. Gankers will just ignore you to save themselves some effort.

- Take the Road Less Traveled: It may or may not add a few more systems to your journey... but you avoid "dangerous routes" this way.
Think of it as taking the "back roads" on a car trip because you don't want to go through high traffic areas that attract crime.

- Fit for Tanking: oh right... there is this option. Tech 2 Reinforced Bulkheads do add a hell of a lot more EHP. But the next point should still be taken into account.

- Cargo Value: unless you are willing to apply some effort in apply the above methods, the best way to avoid being ganked is to simply not carry enough to be worthwhile to gank. It is that simple.
Everyone else (even gankers) has to make tradeoffs in their various professions and freighter pilots are no exception. I do not bling my mission running ship so there is less chance of being ganked... but that means I lose out on greater efficiency and thus more money.
Paranoid Loyd
#379 - 2014-06-13 02:37:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Michael Lafleur wrote:
Try playing Mortal Combat with a friend that is at least 2 times better than you, you rapidly get tired of losing.


This is the essence of your misunderstanding. Every single person who understands this game would never have this attitude. They would keep trying, practice and keep getting their posterior kicked until they figured out how to beat him.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!

Mag's
Azn Empire
#380 - 2014-06-13 08:24:21 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Michael Lafleur wrote:
Try playing Mortal Combat with a friend that is at least 2 times better than you, you rapidly get tired of losing.


This is the essence of your misunderstanding. Every single person who understands this game would never have this attitude. They would keep trying, practice and keep getting their posterior kicked until they figured out how to beat him.
He will never understand, because it in now obvious he is closed to listening and learning.

He has a very small amount of knowledge and as we know, that can be a dangerous thing in certain hands.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.