These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

"Eve is a game driven by consequences for actions." Not if you're into suicide ganking

Author
Elise DarkStar
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#161 - 2011-10-24 16:24:01 UTC
Tanya Fox wrote:
High sec gate camp with a pick-up or two and people scanning in trade hub systems, is not that highly organised. More like a spider sat in a web with a few lookout giving a heads-up when something interesting is coming their way.


Now if they had to get off their butts and actually go looking for their targets then I might be a little bit impressed.


You have absolutely no clue how much effort goes into effective ganking.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#162 - 2011-10-24 16:25:30 UTC
Elise DarkStar wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
plus the whining about insurance is fairly misplaced as the loss on a battleship even post-insurance, which I throw at things willy-nilly when it's the tool for the job, is greater than the loss on an uninsured brutix


Whining about insurance is really counterproductive, as the whiners may even get it as their one chance at a "fix", and then they'll be that much more enraged when it actually doesn't make a lick of difference. My guess is that you'd have more people ganking for the sheer joy as a statement against hisec whining, which is much harder to counter than those who gank for profit.


yeah ganking for profit just isn't that much fun, there's usually a better way to make the money unless you're hunting 2b+ mission runner whales, and freighter ganking is largely boring as you wait for the right one to come along - most freighter ganking ops we've done have gotten bored and just nailed the next one that came through

even when you turn a profit, it's the rage from the guy who just lost his missionrunning boat that really makes it worthwhile rather than the 100m you might have made

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#163 - 2011-10-24 16:29:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
Citizen Smif wrote:
[This thread has made me decide i'm going to go suicide ganking tonight, just for the lulz.


if you want some tips:

for a mackinaw, anywhere but gallente space, you can solo it in a brutix and you can solo it in a thorax with good skills if it's not tanked (look for a DCII or shield extenders) - there's a couple fits for a mack that can beat a solo brutix but they're so inefficent for mining you won't see them anywhere but gallente space

hulks if untanked can be taken out by a brutix but not a thorax in .7 or below, again look for DCII, shield extenders (only mediums really matter) or reinforced bulkhrads

if you see a group of 4+ macks around an orca, fit a typhoon with 8 smartbombs and cap injectors: you can time the cap injection to get another round of smartbombs off after concord neuts you, and done properly you'll kill them all at once. if you use two, you'll definitely get them all, and their pods

if you don't want to deal with sec status problems, stop before you hit -2. if you don't care, you can find our guide to ganking at -5 around

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Spurty
#164 - 2011-10-24 16:29:34 UTC
Really is quite alarmingly dumb sounding when you break it down to it basics.

Why oh why can't people that can engineer warp drives, engineer a better 'ice chipper' ?

The change needed to make this "goon holy war" inert and flaccid is for ice to be mined exactly the same way as other ore.

Didn't get to sit there for an entire cycle as you had to warp off? Not an entire waste of your play time, you just need to return to make up enough to reprocess.

Mining should be getting crazy lucrative now with this pointed attack.

I'm actually all for it myself. Its emerging content and player driven story line stuff. I'm just confused by the lack of imagination here. After all http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/necessity-is-the-mother-of-invention.html


There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#165 - 2011-10-24 16:30:32 UTC
Rocky Deadshot wrote:
Off the top of my head its to the order of 20+hrs (if ice mining) and about 15+hrs (for mining), depending on skills, fit, and a few other parameters.
Doesn't seem like much.... but consider this... I can buy and fit a drake and pay it off doing lvl4 missions in about 2hrs. I can buy and pay of a scimitar in 2hrs doing incursions....
…as can the gankers, but they don't because they don't want something as boring and as safe as L4s — they want to gank. Just like the miners want to mine.

The point here is instead that, unless those miners are losing a Hulk/Mac for every 15–20h in the belts, their risk vs. reward is far better than the gankers, who generally operate at a loss or at best (if they have some help/alts) at break-even. So when people ask “how does the loss of the miner stack up against that of the ganker” or when they ask “where are the risks”, there is the answer: the losses aren't nearly as bad, and the risks are significant…

…the actual “problem” is that the gankers are not concerned about the risks — in fact, one might rather suspect that the risk is the draw rather than some kind of hindrance. Twisted

One might even venture to guess that this is why this whole discussion exists: because the miners assume that measure that would stop them from doing something will stop others, when it's not really a factor for those others and the solution will both fail to solve the perceived problem, and cause entirely new problems to pop up.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#166 - 2011-10-24 16:31:28 UTC
generally speaking the best rage comes from relatively new players, operating alone

crushing big packs of macks won't get you a response for a little while since they're bots, but when the person comes back it's usually quite delightful

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Tanya Fox
Doomheim
#167 - 2011-10-24 16:35:32 UTC
What makes me laugh is why do people that gank always think that somebody that speaks out against it mines.


I don't mine, find it boring tried it years back, it's just not my thing.

Also don't haul anything, not even that keen on high-sec.

And as for tears, got none of those, sorry :)
Razzor Death
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2011-10-24 16:35:35 UTC
We lose our HonouR
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#169 - 2011-10-24 16:40:57 UTC
Tanya Fox wrote:
What makes me laugh is why do people that gank always think that somebody that speaks out against it mines.


I don't mine, find it boring tried it years back, it's just not my thing.

Also don't haul anything, not even that keen on high-sec.

And as for tears, got none of those, sorry :)


so you don't have the excuse that your extremely dumb opinions are due to self-interest, that's not really a positive

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#170 - 2011-10-24 16:41:43 UTC
Razzor Death wrote:
We lose our HonouR

you can't loose thing you have never had Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#171 - 2011-10-24 16:41:58 UTC
Tanya Fox wrote:
What makes me laugh is why do people that gank always think that somebody that speaks out against it mines.
Just like how the victimes always think that someone who condones ganks is a ganker.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#172 - 2011-10-24 16:44:39 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tanya Fox wrote:
What makes me laugh is why do people that gank always think that somebody that speaks out against it mines.
Just like how the victimes always think that someone who condones ganks is a ganker.

not exactly. Usually people who support gankers just like "tears".... While supporters of defense like smart playstyle and industrial part of the game.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#173 - 2011-10-24 16:46:55 UTC
Tippia, you implied that losing a Hulk is not a net loss to a miner. Can you explain the reasoning behind that?
Rocky Deadshot
In The Goo
EVE Trade Alliance
#174 - 2011-10-24 16:47:26 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tanya Fox wrote:
What makes me laugh is why do people that gank always think that somebody that speaks out against it mines.
Just like how the victimes always think that someone who condones ganks is a ganker.


I just assume most people in this game are borderline sociopaths... then I'm not surprised by anything
Hecatonis
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#175 - 2011-10-24 16:47:31 UTC
David Cedarbridge wrote:
Hecatonis wrote:
also incorrect, as the ratio still leads itself in favor of the ganker, 3 fitting brutix still comes out to less then one fitting hulk. thus the gankers win


Lets see if you can ignore my alliance tag for long enough to make a coherent point.


ignoring the fact that i have never made a direct comment to your alliance, i take it you are not going to hold your ground for too long

Quote:

Why does the ratio need to favor the gankee over the ganker? What sort of special place does the victim of the gank have that they should stand to lose less always than the ganker? It would seem that piracy has always been a possible gainful employ in EVE and would cease to be as interesting or gainful if the ratios were to be changed. Which would lead to the assumption that the game should favor the passive player over the active one. What logic is attached to this other than some concept that the non-consensual PVP should be hindered in the favor of more protections for players that would like to participate in all of the gains of an open market and an open playing field, without worrying about taking a loss for it.

In short, you're failing the burden of proof of your own argument. You state that this ratio favors the gankers but you fail to state why this is actually a problem and why it should be considered such.


my point is clear, in the current situation there is no situation were a miner "wins". it will always be a greater lose of the miners side regardless of prep, diligence, and tank.

any group of yahoos can create an alt, train it for a couple months warp to zero and pulse smart bombs until the miner's ship and pod are dead.

eve is about risk vs reward, and wars are fought with isk. you are fighting a war that you cannot loose because your tools are better, cheeper, in more supply, take less time ti build, requires less investment, and can be everywhere.
Tanya Fox
Doomheim
#176 - 2011-10-24 16:47:47 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Tanya Fox wrote:
What makes me laugh is why do people that gank always think that somebody that speaks out against it mines.


I don't mine, find it boring tried it years back, it's just not my thing.

Also don't haul anything, not even that keen on high-sec.

And as for tears, got none of those, sorry :)


so you don't have the excuse that your extremely dumb opinions are due to self-interest, that's not really a positive





Well I'm not that big on self-interest, I think of others too.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Which was going to be the result from the start anyway, but your arguments no better, or should I say your point of view.
Karadion
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#177 - 2011-10-24 16:49:02 UTC
Hecatonis wrote:
my point is clear, in the current situation there is no situation were a miner "wins". it will always be a greater lose of the miners side regardless of prep, diligence, and tank.
You aren't supposed to win at mining. If you want to get involved in minerals, go join a drone region alliance.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#178 - 2011-10-24 16:51:12 UTC
Quote:
my point is clear, in the current situation there is no situation were a miner "wins". it will always be a greater lose of the miners side regardless of prep, diligence, and tank.

You've never seen a failed gank have you?

That is how the miner wins. Make them fail.
Either warp off before they can lock you (keeping aligned and moving to one of any pre placed BMs allowing you to go back and forth while mining... yeah its work), or live long enough for Concord to kill them. Or... make fun use of your kill rights, though that is harder IMO.
Myfanwy Heimdal
Heimdal Freight and Manufacture Inc
#179 - 2011-10-24 16:53:49 UTC
Berendas wrote:
[quote=Suddenly Boom]Maybe not my main, .



Does it matter who your main is?

I have three characters; two I use all the time and the third I don't.

Of the two that I use - one is no more main than the other . Yes, one is older than the other but the younger is richer and has better prospects than the elder.

People do get so hung up on this main/alt business when it doesn't appy.

Pam:  I wonder what my name means in Welsh?Nessa: Why?

Rocky Deadshot
In The Goo
EVE Trade Alliance
#180 - 2011-10-24 16:53:51 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Rocky Deadshot wrote:
Off the top of my head its to the order of 20+hrs (if ice mining) and about 15+hrs (for mining), depending on skills, fit, and a few other parameters.
Doesn't seem like much.... but consider this... I can buy and fit a drake and pay it off doing lvl4 missions in about 2hrs. I can buy and pay of a scimitar in 2hrs doing incursions....
…as can the gankers, but they don't because they don't want something as boring and as safe as L4s — they want to gank. Just like the miners want to mine.

The point here is instead that, unless those miners are losing a Hulk/Mac for every 15–20h in the belts, their risk vs. reward is far better than the gankers, who generally operate at a loss or at best (if they have some help/alts) at break-even. So when people ask “how does the loss of the miner stack up against that of the ganker” or when they ask “where are the risks”, there is the answer: the losses aren't nearly as bad, and the risks are significant…

…the actual “problem” is that the gankers are not concerned about the risks — in fact, one might rather suspect that the risk is the draw rather than some kind of hindrance. Twisted

One might even venture to guess that this is why this whole discussion exists: because the miners assume that measure that would stop them from doing something will stop others, when it's not really a factor for those others and the solution will both fail to solve the perceived problem, and cause entirely new problems to pop up.


Good argument, but I do see one major difference that I should point out.

Gankers that gank to make money... (people who chase down faction fitted BSs) pretty much always make a good payday... they do risk that a bad drop will occur where nothing of extreme value drops, but that is why they go after the ones that have several high value items.

Gankers that gank miners, either for the lolz or as part of a corp initiative, aren't worried about loss of ship. There is no "risk" they know exactly what will happen and the ship is counted as a loss the second its fitted for the gank.

The miner's ship is what makes him money... most gankers probably have alts that make money to fund their tear farming. And 15 to 20hrs of actual in game work gone isn't something miners take lightly.

That being said... I'll stick to my previous suggestion... make a new set of t2 mining barges that have less yield but can actually tank... and ofc make them cost more.