EVE General Discussion

No.

Go discuss it in CAOD, and stop filling up GD with yet another thread about some turd pants you worship.

quote opposite.

Gankers are allowed to gank.

winter coming become ganker yourself for cost of 1mil you can gank any exhumer you chose .

get friend into fleet for just three mil you can gank officer fitted palladin .. enjoy your stay.

See my response to Tippia. To say ganking of mission boats is equal to ganking of miners is a little daft dontcha think? That's denying the obvious and implies that you have no idea about the differences in vessels.

Seriously. It's a lame argument used far too often, why, I have no idea.

Lolno. CONCORD is just as good at stopping missioner ganks — i.e. not at all. That's not their job, so that shouldn't come as a surprise. That's why mission runners have always been the most paranoid bunch when it comes to being ganked (perhaps tied with haulers who “accidentally” go AFK): because they're such common targets.

You're making a classic black-swan mistake by generalising from an exceptional event. You've somehow come to believe that miners are a particularly set upon group of people, when in fact they're such worthless targets that it requires highly publicised special events with rewards and public epeen waving for anyone to even consider hunting them. Outside of those events, people go after the targets that are actually worth anything: mission runners and traders.
Your average mission ship will actually have a tank that's not all that far away from what you can get on a Hulk, as far as ganking them is concerned.
Yes, it's a bit daft. Ganking miners is rare and doesn't generate particularly costly losses.

yet waiting for an hulk to have over 230k ehp with 600 dps output and TP and dual webb .. with 700 m/s speed and good agility.

well suicide ganking happens nothing bad about it. It can be somewhat prevented... aka if you are in mission than your alt in noctis just sitting in entry acc gate you see gank which can shoot your ship you warp off ..

as far as miner go .. well no .. you cant even counter anything by having logis since you get alphaed by 30mil ship soon / price to be discussed/

if you are missioner having fleet of other ten vessels with you will signifacntly reduce chance of you being sucide ganked, being in exhumer having an fleet accomplish nothing.

I dont care that much as i dont mine, but if drone region get nerfed and null alliances will not take it as an opportunity to get more industrialsits in their ranks and just put an blind eye the consequences could be severe.


when people says tactics and strategics the proffesionals says logistics / moving stuff...

Secure your dominance by having good supply of material/ships/modules/people.

I'd like to state that suicide ganking campaigns are great PR for CCP. The gaming press eats it up.

Suicide ganking is here to stay, deal wiz it~

Are you for REAL??????? When was the last time you saw a Hulk tank 15-20+ battleships? You "Ma'am" are ******* amazing.

But get this...

- If I say make mission space Concord free it's vehemently opposed by mission runners. (Tippia and friends)
- If I say remove Concord completely and let Eve be open slather for PvP, the highsec "PvP'ers" fight it vehemently.
- If I suggest a miner has a right to some safety, I'm told "It's a sandbox", "This is Eve", "HTFU"....

Ofc it is. Right up until I suggest you put YOUR ass on the line. Then, THEN it's everything is "working as intended", "this is how it is", "accepted game mechanic", "normal" yadda ya.

It's a ******* joke.

Was that "think" or "thick"?

Was that an "idiot" or a new alliance?

Best you post again.

OH lawdy i wish i could like a post more than once. Regional differences in the behaviour of CONCORD, gate and station guns, caused by sec level of system, status of player, could deliver immensely complex and entertaining wrinkles to empire. Except for the bribing bit, since everybody has to be equally liable to consequences. But the variable hassling of pilots would be great and I imagine it would only take a little coding to create a crazy web of NPC behaviour. Testing it might be a bit huge.

Sorry OP, ganking is part of eve. Humans need play and danger, civilisation offers them work and safety, eve is the most beautiful realisation of the playful danger, don't let the gankers get you down.

Yes. Ganking is part of Eve.

And my OP asks whether it should remain where mining vessels are FOTF (flavour of the forever ) and Concord needs to be buffed to provide some kind of levelling or should Concord be disarmed away from stations and gates bringing MORE targets into a "probable" ganking range.

There's a line being followed that missioners (for example) are "gankable" as well. Yes, agreed, ALL vessels are "gankable". But the probability of success is so far seperated between that of a mining vessel versus a PvE vessel that it's ludicrous.

My post is a challenge to the gank advocates.

If ganking unarmed vessels is "neccessary" for good game play, yadda ya, how about we decrease the range and effectiveness of Concord to increase the likelihood of MORE ganks.

To whit. Either ganking is acceptable and EVERYONE should be roundly and fairly gankable.... Or not.

tbh: I'm on the fence with this one.