EVE General Discussion

For high value mission ships the same principle holds true. Make an estimate of how expensive your ship needs to be for it to be attacked. The higher the value of the ship, the greater the risk. Then estimate how many missions you can do before you get destroyed. That's your risk vs reward for mission ships. If you set the budget for your ship low enough, you can control the risk until it reaches to near zero. You might want to include the risk of being blown up by NPC's as well and figure that into your plan.

A pirate or faction battleship might need to be 4 or 5 billion isk in modules before suicide gankers target it. That's a guestimate on my part. You can figure that you are entering an increasingly risky zone when you go over that. So set your ship budget at 2 or 3 billion in modules. You still might be suicide ganked, but at that level, it would be very rare. At that level you can probably assume it will be profitable for you to mission and if you lose your ship, you have will probably have already done enough missions to cover the cost of the ship and a large amount of profit. If you do 2000 missions for every time you get ganked, assuming 20m a mission you will have made 40 billion, well more than enough to cover the cost of your ship.

If your ship is worth say 10b, you can figure the risk is much higher. You might assume you will be ganked 1 every 1000 missions. You will have earned 20 billion with a loss of about 11.5 billion for perhaps a Vindicator or Machariel (10 billion in modules and 1.5 billion for hull) or something like that. You can see the risk vs. reward doesn't stack up as well. Even assuming the same risk as a 2 or 3 billion isk ship, it still doesn't stack up very well, 11.5b/40b.

You can also figure that there are other ways to reduce risk, perhaps staying in the same system will keep you from being scanned at the gates. If someone warps into your mission, perhaps you should dock up, that might reduce your risk. You might figure to switch from a Machariel or whatever to a Tengu and haul that in your Orca, so you don't get ganked on the gate. If you find enough ways to reduce your risk, you might determine that using 10 billion isk in modules is safe enough to earn a decent return on your investment considering the risks. The more likely scenario is that you will decide not go that high and stay in the 2 or 3 billion isk range.

tl;dr: You can very easily make a risk vs reward assessment for pimp mission ships and control the odds of them getting ganked. You might not get exact numbers, but you can game out the scenario.

Hi-sec does need more exceptions. It needs all the protection it can get from goonie exploitation.

You don't need to.

You might choose to, accepting that it will take longer in exchange for it being safer, or you might choose to do it all in one run, accepting an increased risk in exchange for less effort.

Or you could pay others to do your hauling.

Or you could choose your manufacturing location to be near LS, and JF the stuff to nearby LS, accepting fuel cost in exchange for safety+speed.

Safely hauling large volumes of extremely valuable things should not be fast, safe, and free. It should be 1 or 2 of those things. And with the Orca nerf, you can pick one or two of them.

Fast + Free = Freighter with everything loaded in.
Fast + Safe = JF to nearby LS (then multiple 1 jump JF trips to haul it out of LS in not gank worthy shipments. This is likely faster than the option above.).
Free + Safe = 10 x 40 jump trips in a Freighter.


Oh, and there's really no valid reason to park your manufacturing setup 40 jumps from your material source. That's just silly.

No lie. Goons blow up a lot of freighters. Are they rich because of that. Yes. But like all things, if it gets out of control CCP will nerf it. Right now its not out of control. There are also limits to what CCP can do without breaking the game. In the grand scheme of things, billions taken out of an economy worth trillions won't break things. They aren't making isk like they did with the totally broken factional warfare. That was obscene.

As for mission ships. Go look over Eve-kill and see for yourself. Mission ships aren't being suicide ganked all that much.

There are problems on the horizon though. My worry is that people will find a way to automate suicide ganking, then you really have a big problem. I don't know what CCP would try to do about something like that. But stuff like that is in the future. Right now its not a crisis.

If you hate Goons so much my advice is to improve your propaganda. The stuff you are churning out right now is pretty weak. Hire someone to make a funny video that mocks Goons. People would eat that stuff up. Here is an oldie but a goodie. A lot of people used to see Goons that way. Too bad they have been able to shake some of that off. The serious Goons have taken over.

Point 1:

Even if I chose something like Red Frog, they'd still not be as time critical as I need to AND most of all, they'd still carry 50k m3 of stuff (out of 900k m3 room) at at time because they seem to know the game well enough and so they hard limit the value they ferry.

So, I just pay somebody else to still fly "crippled" because neither their ships nor their expertise nor being a "fitting pro" would help them a iota avoiding being ganked. What game design did I fix by having others flying crippled in my place? None.


Point 2:

There's a reason why an huge number of people wasted sizable skill points to train the mining Orca prerequisites (luckly being removed but guess what, I had to waste them) and are using a mining, capital ship to do the job of a not existing, non mining, non capital ship.
There's just an empty niche, I am very surprised self appointed industrialists defenders don't see the obvious lack of such a ship.




Maybe the soft null seccers of these days can't even drink water without a titan bridge network. I have been logistics officer in a low sec / FW / 0.0 corporation and done the whole "fly escorted indy / freigthers all the way down there" thing and nobody suffered particular diseases. And we took sov from others who had it. And their moons. And full capital ships replacement program before we had a single moon. How's that possible, eh?

So get off these excuses, they are exactly that, excuses to never touch something (bridges) that should NEVER have been implemented in a vaguely decent game.




In my country we are told the same options: "nobody cares to build a decent railway nor a speedway so feel free to take 6 hours to travel just 200 km between two chief towns throught awful small roads or take a ferry boat taking 6 hours to do the same".

Sure it's available options... and sure they are pathetic.




Making more profit in there maybe is a good reason enough?




Let me tell you how you don't exactly mind read too well.
I don't want a safe hidden corp hangar, I don't want a stupid god mode tank nor a "CCP tanked" ship with nothing fitted like a freighter.

I just want something that is not a "steal" from a mining capital ship but a proper, fittable *with my choices of tank* ship that comes with 60-70k m3 cargo. Available cargo that *by making choices* can go down by fitting more tank.

It's certainly more EvE philosophy abiding than some lol "CCP tanked" freighter with zero fitting choice, it's certainly more EvE "ships are specialized" philosophy than borrowing a capital mining ship and it's certainly more fair than a "god mode" Mackinaw tank.

I move tens of billions each week, but I do not do it by flying multiple times. Instead do I use other players to do it for me (courier contracts).

This means that with ganking for profit I do lose the possibility to move expensive stuff completely on my own, but it has not become impossible for me and turns into a gain for a greater number of players. I still have control over the additional cost this creates and this cost is regulated by demand and offer on the courier contract market.

Read my post again. None of the three pair options I presented were Red-Frog.
Fast + Free = Overloaded Freighter
Fast + Safe = JF to nearest LS
Free + Safe = 10 Freighters

Doesn't matter who does the movement, you can pick two of the 3. There is no niche remaining (aside the Overpowered "all three" that the Orca used to fill).

Yes, lots of people train for OP things (I sure as hell did). That does not imply that it is balanced.




I'm just explaining what would happen if you removed JFs. You would make things significantly harder for smaller groups, and not significantly affect the operations of larger ones.

Also Freighter Escort Ops don't belong in any half decent game.




Except that the options I present are not all identical. In this case, 3 options each with different specific advantages and disadvantages.


Then don't complain about the extra expense to move your materials.



Ok. You'll have that in the spring expansion with the new Orca (and it comes with bonus free mining support abilities). Doesn't have much to do with your original "how do I move 10b safely in one trip" issue.

There is always blue/black frog as well.

Blue Frog has a base "limit" of 5b, though will apparently go over that if contacted first.
Black Frog has a limit of 5b.

granted, "time critical" is the important thing. Perhaps talking to their leadership about paying more for "overnight delivery" or something?

But what bulky and expensive stuff is there? There just is not much and the rarity only leads to the problem of prices becoming meaningless for a sensible discussion, because it turns towards fiction.

You also cannot blame outsourcing for being a bad solution, when ganking itself is an organized endeavour. It rather seems to balance it, which I think is a good balance considering this is an MMO. I do not expect to fight a fleet single-handedly. Nor do I want others to haul my stuff for free and nor do the gankers want to work without pay.

No, just yours is, because this is a terrible response you are giving.

Goons do use their knowledge of 0.0 survival and apply it against high-sec players when really it should only be a necessity for 0.0 life. You only have no better challenges to go for.