These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

HiSec Miners - Sponsoring Risk Aversion

Author
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-06-08 19:57:43 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Step 3 hasn't occurred so let's not get ahead of ourselves


You can try to take down my Rokh in 1.0 space. Big smile
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2012-06-08 19:59:10 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Step 3 hasn't occurred so let's not get ahead of ourselves


You can try to take down my Rokh in 1.0 space. Big smile


Why? There are 30 to 40 untanked hulks to make a profit on. Mine away good sir.
DHuncan
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#43 - 2012-06-08 19:59:13 UTC
Yeah I have read it. I guess all who goes mining, then reproces, then construct, and then use the self made ammo and ship to run some missions is, according to this philosophy, a miner and a carebear. The oposite sort of player is the cool, brave and smart ganker. Now it is clear enaugh.

What did you say about CODE?

Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#44 - 2012-06-08 20:01:10 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Why? There are 30 to 40 untanked hulks to make a profit on. Mine away good sir.


Too tough target for you? Sad
DHuncan
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#45 - 2012-06-08 20:02:29 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Step 3 hasn't occurred so let's not get ahead of ourselves


You can try to take down my Rokh in 1.0 space. Big smile


Why? There are 30 to 40 untanked hulks to make a profit on. Mine away good sir.


To have legitimity to then come here and pretend you have guts, instead of pretending the same after killing miners and taking us all for stupid? You painted an accurate portrail of yourselves guys and guys (with female avatars, this in my village we cal transvestidos). And thats why you are doomed, mark my words.

What did you say about CODE?

Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-06-08 20:19:16 UTC
Morganta wrote:
MasterEnt wrote:
When you really think about it, its not the miners who are Risk-Adverse.

HiSec Miners are
- Still out there in HiSec flying expensive ships despite the "war"... RISK.

Gankers are
- Loading out cheap combat ships to fight non-combat ships that cannot fight back... NO RISK.
- Attacking under circumstances where allies cannot always help out due to HiSec mechanics... NO RISK.
- Getting paid to make said attacks, which nullifies loss... NO RISK.

It is actually the gankers who are risk-adverse.
Bravo to Hulkageddoners on the spin. Well Played

This is why I love EVE. Now lets move on.



ganking is 100% risk

since when is a fully fit DPS tornado cheap? 100% RISK
concord always helps out the downtrodden 100% RISK
10% of your losses is getting paid? hell insurance pays more... oh but gankers don't get that, do they? 100% RISK

your argument is thusly refuted


Its not a risk when you know its going to happen before you take the action, its an expense for the activity you choose to do. Risk implies chance, there is no chance the ganker will not loose his ship.
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2012-06-08 20:23:57 UTC
Zyress wrote:
Its not a risk when you know its going to happen before you take the action, its an expense for the activity you choose to do. Risk implies chance, there is no chance the ganker will not loose his ship.


make concord chance-based, done, suicide ganking has risk

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#48 - 2012-06-08 20:33:54 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Zyress wrote:
Its not a risk when you know its going to happen before you take the action, its an expense for the activity you choose to do. Risk implies chance, there is no chance the ganker will not loose his ship.


make concord chance-based, done, suicide ganking has risk


No then it just has a possible bonus
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#49 - 2012-06-08 20:36:33 UTC
Zyress wrote:
Morganta wrote:
MasterEnt wrote:
When you really think about it, its not the miners who are Risk-Adverse.

HiSec Miners are
- Still out there in HiSec flying expensive ships despite the "war"... RISK.

Gankers are
- Loading out cheap combat ships to fight non-combat ships that cannot fight back... NO RISK.
- Attacking under circumstances where allies cannot always help out due to HiSec mechanics... NO RISK.
- Getting paid to make said attacks, which nullifies loss... NO RISK.

It is actually the gankers who are risk-adverse.
Bravo to Hulkageddoners on the spin. Well Played

This is why I love EVE. Now lets move on.



ganking is 100% risk

since when is a fully fit DPS tornado cheap? 100% RISK
concord always helps out the downtrodden 100% RISK
10% of your losses is getting paid? hell insurance pays more... oh but gankers don't get that, do they? 100% RISK

your argument is thusly refuted


Its not a risk when you know its going to happen before you take the action, its an expense for the activity you choose to do. Risk implies chance, there is no chance the ganker will not loose his ship.



a calculated risk is still a risk
ask any investor or owner of facebook stock
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-06-08 20:38:52 UTC
Morganta wrote:
Zyress wrote:
Morganta wrote:
MasterEnt wrote:
When you really think about it, its not the miners who are Risk-Adverse.

HiSec Miners are
- Still out there in HiSec flying expensive ships despite the "war"... RISK.

Gankers are
- Loading out cheap combat ships to fight non-combat ships that cannot fight back... NO RISK.
- Attacking under circumstances where allies cannot always help out due to HiSec mechanics... NO RISK.
- Getting paid to make said attacks, which nullifies loss... NO RISK.

It is actually the gankers who are risk-adverse.
Bravo to Hulkageddoners on the spin. Well Played

This is why I love EVE. Now lets move on.



ganking is 100% risk

since when is a fully fit DPS tornado cheap? 100% RISK
concord always helps out the downtrodden 100% RISK
10% of your losses is getting paid? hell insurance pays more... oh but gankers don't get that, do they? 100% RISK

your argument is thusly refuted


Its not a risk when you know its going to happen before you take the action, its an expense for the activity you choose to do. Risk implies chance, there is no chance the ganker will not loose his ship.



a calculated risk is still a risk
ask any investor or owner of facebook stock


LoL calculated expense, no chance, no risk
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#51 - 2012-06-08 21:12:41 UTC
Simple fix.

Swop the market value of destroyers and hulks.

If destroyers cost 300 mil a pop and Hulks cost 1 mil....

Problem solved.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#52 - 2012-06-08 21:23:15 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Simple fix.

Swop the market value of destroyers and hulks.

If destroyers cost 300 mil a pop and Hulks cost 1 mil....

Problem solved.

I'd love 1 mil hulks, tbh.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Toroup
Prometheus Deep Core Mining and Salvage
#53 - 2012-06-08 21:30:34 UTC
I do love how everything that the gankers fly was created through immaculate conception and required no resources from miners at all. If miners didn't exist, you would be shooting spit wads at each other....

This "war", is not nothing more than grand scale market manipulation - those who think that it is anything different are blind to the bigger picture.
Delen Ormand
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2012-06-08 22:27:06 UTC
Morganta wrote:


ganking is 100% risk

since when is a fully fit DPS tornado cheap? 100% RISK
concord always helps out the downtrodden 100% RISK
10% of your losses is getting paid? hell insurance pays more... oh but gankers don't get that, do they? 100% RISK

your argument is thusly refuted


All of those are known quantities so they're a cost rather than a risk. Plus, if your ganking for profit, the cost of ships, insurance and modules are an investment.

And seriously... "thusly refuted?" Roll
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#55 - 2012-06-09 00:18:15 UTC
Morganta wrote:
ganking is 100% risk


The "risk" in ganking is the cost a gank modified by the chance that your outcome will not be achieved. That catalyst you are using to suicide gank is an expense, not a risk. You know that it is going to be destroyed as part of your activity and you have planned to exchange the value of a Catalyst for the value of an explosion (ideally two explosions, one being the target).

Risk = Cost of Attempt x Chance of Failure

Reward = Value of Success x Chance of Success

Since you as the ganker can take measures to reduce the chance of failure to 0 (i.e.: get a proper warp-in, survey the target before shooting it), the risk drops very quickly to 0. You as the ganker also have economic value to extract from your success: make sure you have a salvager around who can scoop up the material from your wreck and the target's wreck, and salvage the two.

Suicide ganking exhumers in hisec is a relatively risk-free activity. The burden is security status loss, but even that isn't much of a burden if you have appropriate infrastructure available: an alt flying an orca providing you with a supply of ganking catalysts means you can laugh in the face of hisec denizens everywhere. You perform your gank, you have an alt in a frigate scooping up the goods* & salvaging the wrecks, then you sit back and relax for 15 minutes until your next attempt (or better, switch to another character on the same account and gank every 5 minutes).

* the hard part here is remembering to scoop into jet cans when the stuff you're trying to scoop won't fit in cargo, and you'll be competing with jackals attempting to profit from your endeavour.

Ganking is most certainly not 100% risk. To claim such is to suggest that mission-running is 100% risk because you lose all that ammo!
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#56 - 2012-06-09 00:35:47 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Morganta wrote:
ganking is 100% risk

stuff

Chance of failure can never be zero. There is always a chance that lag will mess you up (which the ganker cannot completely prepare against).
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#57 - 2012-06-09 00:55:30 UTC
Morganta wrote:

a calculated risk is still a risk
ask any investor or owner of facebook stock


TBH those who invested in facebook stock must play zero tank Hulks in EvE. The brain is just that one.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#58 - 2012-06-09 01:01:59 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Morganta wrote:
ganking is 100% risk

stuff

Chance of failure can never be zero. There is always a chance that lag will mess you up (which the ganker cannot completely prepare against).


Same for L4 missions. The server could shut down. An earthquake could destroy CCP's datacenter and other similar frequent events.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#59 - 2012-06-09 01:28:44 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Morganta wrote:
ganking is 100% risk

stuff

Chance of failure can never be zero. There is always a chance that lag will mess you up (which the ganker cannot completely prepare against).


Chance of success can never be zero either. Ganking is never 100% risk. I expect that with a few simple precautions (scanning the target ahead of time, picking fleets with no combat drones, picking solo miners or fleets with no orca), the chance of failure will be low single digits.
Aooz
Doomheim
#60 - 2012-06-09 01:31:58 UTC
Disregard That wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Its only risk free because the miners make it risk free.

This, a thousand times.

Did you know that once a player goes GCC they usually take several more seconds to inflict any damage?

Miners could fight back. They choose not to. They choose to post whine threads instead.

And occasionally whine spin threads, too.

That is why they fail.



Oh wow, "it's the miners fault they don't kill us when we arrive instead of mining lolz stupid miner"