These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Should Ganking be profitable?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Runeme Shilter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#221 - 2013-03-21 09:19:43 UTC
Azrael Dinn wrote:
This is why ganging is out of line atm

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216694&find=unread


You say ganking is out of line because when 50-75 people attack you don't magically survive?

Quote:

Now I do agree that people should be able to gang ships in high sex. The problem what I have with it is that it's too easy and I have no legimet claim to my own property that has stolen from me.


Yes, clearly organizing 50-75 people, have them online at the same time and ready to undock is a very easy thing to do. All the gank target needs to counter this gang of catalysts is a 2-3 friends in a logi.

Quote:

I see it in the way that customs officers and concord should engage (for a period of time) the persons robbing my stuff from my wrecks.

Now yes yes it's not right, we can't get anything ever after that. How about if you then add the bloackade runners into to the mix so you could have a chance to get the loot if you where the pirate. This would be something that would make ganging abit harder for pirates and mayby abit more interesting cause someone would be chacing you actualy. risk vs. reward Cool


The looter already goes suspect so can be freely attacked by the gank target's friends and any passersby. Seems balanced to me.
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#222 - 2013-03-21 09:52:27 UTC
Runeme Shilter wrote:
Azrael Dinn wrote:
This is why ganging is out of line atm

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216694&find=unread


You say ganking is out of line because when 50-75 people attack you don't magically survive?

Quote:

Now I do agree that people should be able to gang ships in high sex. The problem what I have with it is that it's too easy and I have no legimet claim to my own property that has stolen from me.


Yes, clearly organizing 50-75 people, have them online at the same time and ready to undock is a very easy thing to do. All the gank target needs to counter this gang of catalysts is a 2-3 friends in a logi.

Quote:

I see it in the way that customs officers and concord should engage (for a period of time) the persons robbing my stuff from my wrecks.

Now yes yes it's not right, we can't get anything ever after that. How about if you then add the bloackade runners into to the mix so you could have a chance to get the loot if you where the pirate. This would be something that would make ganging abit harder for pirates and mayby abit more interesting cause someone would be chacing you actualy. risk vs. reward Cool


The looter already goes suspect so can be freely attacked by the gank target's friends and any passersby. Seems balanced to me.


The harder and less profitable ganking becomes, the more you'll be left with fanatics and highly-organised goon-sponsored crusaders.

CCP traded having to deal with pirates to having to deal with madmen.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#223 - 2013-03-21 11:14:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Azrael Dinn wrote:
This is why ganging is out of line atm

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216694&find=unread


i realize that most people in hisec just think "if money out > money in, then it's worth doing" but that really isn't the case and you clearly don't know the first thing about suicide ganking

also whoever loots your stuff gets suspect flagged, and i find it unsurprising that an entitled hiseccer is demanding that NPCs fight his battles even more

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Velicitia
XS Tech
#224 - 2013-03-21 12:09:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Andski wrote:

also whoever loots your stuff gets suspect flagged, and i find it unsurprising that an entitled hiseccer is demanding that NPCs fight his battles even more



Personally, I'd rather that they can't dock up (or jump) for 15 minutes, so I can chase them around system.

Granted, this can be negated by:
POS
Cloak
I'm just that bad at probing
Someone else got to them first


edit for clarity --> Buff hisec -- nerf CONCORD!

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#225 - 2013-03-21 12:35:30 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender)."

What is everyones opinion?


Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Whitehound
#226 - 2013-03-21 13:49:33 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

ISK tanking is fine. If it was nonsense then Titans should not cost billions and yet we find the cost factor makes complete sense. It works on the large scale and on the small scale has it additional detail to it including a few twists. That is all right.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#227 - 2013-03-21 13:57:54 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

ISK tanking is fine. If it was nonsense then Titans should not cost billions and yet we find the cost factor makes complete sense. It works on the large scale and on the small scale has it additional detail to it including a few twists. That is all right.


that isn't how it works

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Lin Suizei
#228 - 2013-03-21 14:00:06 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

ISK tanking is fine. If it was nonsense then Titans should not cost billions and yet we find the cost factor makes complete sense. It works on the large scale and on the small scale has it additional detail to it including a few twists. That is all right.


WTB bomber with a cruiser-sized tank.

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.
Whitehound
#229 - 2013-03-21 14:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Andski wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

ISK tanking is fine. If it was nonsense then Titans should not cost billions and yet we find the cost factor makes complete sense. It works on the large scale and on the small scale has it additional detail to it including a few twists. That is all right.


that isn't how it works

Sure it is. Just because I can tag a price of 1 ISK onto a Titan or a trillion ISK onto a frigate does not contradict it. Only idiots sell Titans for 1 ISK or pay a trillion for a frigate, and anyone who believes this contradicts ISK tanking is one of them.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#230 - 2013-03-21 14:20:20 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Andski wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

ISK tanking is fine. If it was nonsense then Titans should not cost billions and yet we find the cost factor makes complete sense. It works on the large scale and on the small scale has it additional detail to it including a few twists. That is all right.


that isn't how it works

Sure it is. Just because I can tag a price of 1 ISK onto a Titan or a trillion ISK onto a frigate does not contradict it. Only idiots sell Titans for 1 ISK or pay a trillion for a frigate, and anyone who believes this contradicts ISK tanking is one of them idiots.


yes titans are definitely isk tanked when they die to 20-30 neuting tempests and have only 6x the base HP of a carrier while costing 40-50x as much

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Whitehound
#231 - 2013-03-21 14:27:03 UTC
Andski wrote:
yes titans are definitely isk tanked when they die to 20-30 neuting tempests and have only 6x the base HP of a carrier while costing 40-50x as much

It still is not a contradiction. You only have discovered the factors which influence it.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
HollyShocker 2inthestink
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#232 - 2013-03-21 16:13:15 UTC
Andski wrote:
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
They seemed to do it for the miners so the game must have been for them. maybe they will make it so this game is for me next.

For the record I have yet to loose a high dollar ship to hi-sec pvp but I know several pilots that have.

I play in all three secs. I feel each should provide its own unique play style. hi-sec shouldnt be for bored players as a venue to gank and grief players and make a profit.

If you want to kill and or grief players in hi-sec then it should cost you.


maybe you don't understand what "losing a ship" entails

hint, it entails losing the ship and everything in it, unless you manage to loot your wreck before someone else does

also last I heard miners don't keep whatever ore they mined when they were suicide ganked, nor do they get anything back

because, well, losses actually matter in this game unlike in whatever wretched themepark you came from


So using your words "maybe you don't understand what "losing a ship" entails

hint, it entails losing the ship and everything in it". Then no one should get any salvage. Great idea Goon
HollyShocker 2inthestink
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#233 - 2013-03-21 16:16:01 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:


They seemed to do it for the miners so the game must have been for them. maybe they will make it so this game is for me next.



Just gonna highlight this so CCP can see what happens when you give one group of people something (they don't really need) for free instead of requiring them to figure it out for themselves. Every single "gimmie gimmie" person in the game then demands the same considereration.

Think about that next time.........



It seemed the DEV's felt it was needed.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#234 - 2013-03-21 16:20:25 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:


So using your words "maybe you don't understand what "losing a ship" entails

hint, it entails losing the ship and everything in it". Then no one should get any salvage. Great idea Goon


And at a stroke you just made all ship pvp unprofitable and wiped out several playstyles.

Congrats you just broke a great chunk of the core of EVE.
HollyShocker 2inthestink
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#235 - 2013-03-21 16:20:26 UTC
Bottom line here is DEV Soundwave said he felt ganking should be possible but not profitable I agreee with him. Argue with him about.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#236 - 2013-03-21 16:21:54 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:


It seemed the DEV's felt it was needed.


They were wrong and we got an unbalanced ship lineup.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#237 - 2013-03-21 16:23:11 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Bottom line here is DEV Soundwave said he felt ganking should be possible but not profitable I agreee with him. Argue with him about.


No he said that bare barge hulls should not be profitable to gank and everyone agrees with him. He never said ALL ganking should be unprofitable.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#238 - 2013-03-21 16:27:54 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Andski wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Anyone who supports isk tanking probably shouldn't be working for CCP right now.

ISK tanking is fine. If it was nonsense then Titans should not cost billions and yet we find the cost factor makes complete sense. It works on the large scale and on the small scale has it additional detail to it including a few twists. That is all right.


that isn't how it works

Sure it is. Just because I can tag a price of 1 ISK onto a Titan or a trillion ISK onto a frigate does not contradict it. Only idiots sell Titans for 1 ISK or pay a trillion for a frigate, and anyone who believes this contradicts ISK tanking is one of them.


I'm pretty sure you messed something up somewhere in your arguments.

"ISK Tanking" is mostly only relevant in hisec... to the point where a freighter has a "1 bil ISK Tank" -- i.e. you throw stuff that collectively is worth more than a billion into it, and you're suddenly a juicy suicide gank target...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
HollyShocker 2inthestink
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#239 - 2013-03-21 16:28:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:


So using your words "maybe you don't understand what "losing a ship" entails

hint, it entails losing the ship and everything in it". Then no one should get any salvage. Great idea Goon


And at a stroke you just made all ship pvp unprofitable and wiped out several playstyles.

Congrats you just broke a great chunk of the core of EVE.

Not me, the Goon did. They made ganking retrievers not profitable I am sure they could find a way to do it for other high value ships in hi-sec.

You guys keep trying to find micro fault with every little comment becuase you are afaraid you may loose something. I didnt say it should be done for the whole game. Obviously if you make the effort and kill somone in low/null then you earned your reward.

The problem most of you have with it is you think it takes away your easy mode pvp. You could still gank just like you can a retriever just wouldnt make a profit. I understand you dont want to go to null/low where the playing field might be more level and where people are more prepared for pvp.

Only thing I would like to see is the proifit removed just as DEV Soundwave suggested.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#240 - 2013-03-21 16:31:18 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Bottom line here is DEV Soundwave said he felt ganking should be possible but not profitable I agreee with him. Argue with him about.


No he said that bare barge hulls should not be profitable to gank and everyone agrees with him. He never said ALL ganking should be unprofitable.


Would it just have been possible to nerf the salvage drop from exhumer/barge to make them unprofitable to gank when naked without changing the EHP at all?

Keep the idea of function change where one is more tanky, one more hold and one more yield but no EHP buff on top of that.