These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Hi-sec suicide ganking

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2013-07-06 14:08:38 UTC
Andski wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
They're irrelevant to the discussion.


no, they're not, because you claim that EHP increases with build cost which is a lie

Not a lie at all. Build cost and EHP are related. A frigs build cost and EHP are lower than dessie which is lower than cruiser and so on. I didn't say they were all perfectly linear.

Exhumer EHP was buffed because they were too easy to gank vs cost of the hull. The same is now true of freighters.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2013-07-06 14:12:23 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Andski wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
They're irrelevant to the discussion.


no, they're not, because you claim that EHP increases with build cost which is a lie

Not a lie at all. Build cost and EHP are related. A frigs build cost and EHP are lower than dessie which is lower than cruiser and so on. I didn't say they were all perfectly linear.

Exhumer EHP was buffed because they were too easy to gank vs cost of the hull. The same is now true of freighters.


none of them should be linear

Quote:

I want to make it clear that one of our goals in this rebalancing pass is to somewhat narrow the gap between higher cost and lower cost ships compared to the canyon that existed in the past. We are not planning on buffing the high cost ships to the same degree that we did with the T1 Frigates and Cruisers, as this would simply create direct power creep and leave us right back where we started. We want to reach a place where cheaper ships are more than just something you fly when you start the game, but instead present a viable and interesting option to be chosen by people of many levels of experience. Our vision for cost-balancing is that cost should play a limited part in balancing ships and that obtaining a roughly linear increase in effectiveness should require an exponential increase in cost.


http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/74270
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2013-07-06 14:15:24 UTC
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2013-07-06 14:18:13 UTC
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Andski wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
They're irrelevant to the discussion.


no, they're not, because you claim that EHP increases with build cost which is a lie

Not a lie at all. Build cost and EHP are related. A frigs build cost and EHP are lower than dessie which is lower than cruiser and so on. I didn't say they were all perfectly linear.

Exhumer EHP was buffed because they were too easy to gank vs cost of the hull. The same is now true of freighters.


none of them should be linear

Quote:

I want to make it clear that one of our goals in this rebalancing pass is to somewhat narrow the gap between higher cost and lower cost ships compared to the canyon that existed in the past. We are not planning on buffing the high cost ships to the same degree that we did with the T1 Frigates and Cruisers, as this would simply create direct power creep and leave us right back where we started. We want to reach a place where cheaper ships are more than just something you fly when you start the game, but instead present a viable and interesting option to be chosen by people of many levels of experience. Our vision for cost-balancing is that cost should play a limited part in balancing ships and that obtaining a roughly linear increase in effectiveness should require an exponential increase in cost.


http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/74270

That is referring to ship capability. As in a Osprey should be as effective as a Moa in regards to its differing role.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2013-07-06 14:22:16 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Andski wrote:


no, they're not, because you claim that EHP increases with build cost which is a lie

Not a lie at all. Build cost and EHP are related. A frigs build cost and EHP are lower than dessie which is lower than cruiser and so on. I didn't say they were all perfectly linear.

Exhumer EHP was buffed because they were too easy to gank vs cost of the hull. The same is now true of freighters.


none of them should be linear

Quote:

I want to make it clear that one of our goals in this rebalancing pass is to somewhat narrow the gap between higher cost and lower cost ships compared to the canyon that existed in the past. We are not planning on buffing the high cost ships to the same degree that we did with the T1 Frigates and Cruisers, as this would simply create direct power creep and leave us right back where we started. We want to reach a place where cheaper ships are more than just something you fly when you start the game, but instead present a viable and interesting option to be chosen by people of many levels of experience. Our vision for cost-balancing is that cost should play a limited part in balancing ships and that obtaining a roughly linear increase in effectiveness should require an exponential increase in cost.


http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/74270

That is referring to ship capability. As in a Osprey should be as effective as a Moa in regards to its differing role.


tank is part of a ships capability
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#66 - 2013-07-06 14:28:24 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Not a lie at all. Build cost and EHP are related. A frigs build cost and EHP are lower than dessie which is lower than cruiser and so on. I didn't say they were all perfectly linear.

Exhumer EHP was buffed because they were too easy to gank vs cost of the hull. The same is now true of freighters.


sure, but how many catalysts do you think it takes to kill a mackinaw

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#67 - 2013-07-06 14:34:18 UTC
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:

tank is part of a ships capability

So you think they're saying 30 Dessies costing around 70 mill should be able to gank a multi billion isk freighter before concord shows up? I didnt read that in the post at all. All I read was something about combat ship progression and top line shops not obsoleting formerly lower tier ships based purely on cost of hull.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#68 - 2013-07-06 14:36:43 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
So you think they're saying 30 Dessies costing around 70 mill should be able to gank a multi billion isk freighter before concord shows up?


yes

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#69 - 2013-07-06 14:37:15 UTC
as it turns out this is a "multiplayer game" and there are rewards for playing "eve online" in multiplayer

i can see why afk autopiloting freighter pilots dislike this idea but that's just how it goes

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#70 - 2013-07-06 14:43:11 UTC
seriously trying to give freighters enough EHP to tank their cost in catalysts in 0.5 means giving them enough EHP to tank multiple doomsdays

i don't think CCP will agree that freighters need to tank doomsdays

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2013-07-06 15:19:18 UTC
Andski wrote:
seriously trying to give freighters enough EHP to tank their cost in catalysts in 0.5 means giving them enough EHP to tank multiple doomsdays

i don't think CCP will agree that freighters need to tank doomsdays

Yeah perhaps the issue is both EHP + a destroyer that does close to 700 dps + concord response time.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2013-07-06 15:25:55 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Yeah perhaps the issue is both EHP + a destroyer that does close to 700 dps + concord response time.


The usual gank catalysts are very very easy to destroy, just use insta-canes against them, you can one-shot them. That makes them pretty balanced as they trade tank for dps - as it should be.
Spectatoress
Doomheim
#73 - 2013-07-06 15:31:17 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Faction play no role. Concord is irrelevant when it comes to ganking since ganking is so quick even on a capital class hull.
ganking needs to be fast because after a certain amount of time CONCORD shows up and kills everybody

that's why they call it 'suicide ganking'

if you have any more questions about basic game mechanics feel free to ask

Lol. You need to think before you post. You just agreed with what I said without even realising it.

you're unable to comprehend or unwilling to accept that the reason what few organised ganking groups exist are able to operate within the strict limitations imposed by highsec mechanics are able to do so because they have numbers, they plan well, they have good knowledge of mechanics and calulating ehp/expected dps, they have well organised fleets and patient, competent, experienced members

the point of my post was to try and make this clear to you - that the reason ganking must be quick is due to the limitation of CONCORD and faction police. it is not that ganking as an activity is too easy that CONCORD cannot turn up in time, it is that the fleet is forced by game mechanics to be incredibly efficient

the fact that you thought my post was in any way agreeing with you doesn't speak well for your comprehension skills


You have absolutely no clue what youre talking about. So you shouldnt lecture others about comprehension.

Suicide ganking a freighter is that absurdly easy nowadays that is even done with multiboxing.

Entertain me and tell whats about competence to bump a freighter off gate/grid, launch an absurdly cheap fleet of Catalysts who is controlled by maybe 6 real Players with isboxer, warp to member, target freighter and press F1 on 3,2,1 Fire.

Getting a monkey who fits the catalysts in advance?
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2013-07-06 15:32:50 UTC
Spectatoress wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Faction play no role. Concord is irrelevant when it comes to ganking since ganking is so quick even on a capital class hull.
ganking needs to be fast because after a certain amount of time CONCORD shows up and kills everybody

that's why they call it 'suicide ganking'

if you have any more questions about basic game mechanics feel free to ask

Lol. You need to think before you post. You just agreed with what I said without even realising it.

you're unable to comprehend or unwilling to accept that the reason what few organised ganking groups exist are able to operate within the strict limitations imposed by highsec mechanics are able to do so because they have numbers, they plan well, they have good knowledge of mechanics and calulating ehp/expected dps, they have well organised fleets and patient, competent, experienced members

the point of my post was to try and make this clear to you - that the reason ganking must be quick is due to the limitation of CONCORD and faction police. it is not that ganking as an activity is too easy that CONCORD cannot turn up in time, it is that the fleet is forced by game mechanics to be incredibly efficient

the fact that you thought my post was in any way agreeing with you doesn't speak well for your comprehension skills


You have absolutely no clue what youre talking about. So you shouldnt lecture others about comprehension.

Suicide ganking a freighter is that absurdly easy nowadays that is even done with multiboxing.

Entertain me and tell whats about competence to bump a freighter off gate/grid, launch an absurdly cheap fleet of Catalysts who is controlled by maybe 6 real Players with isboxer, warp to member, target freighter and press F1 on 3,2,1 Fire.

Getting a monkey who fits the catalysts in advance?


and yet despite how easy it is claimed to be, its still absurdly rare
Spectatoress
Doomheim
#75 - 2013-07-06 15:36:08 UTC
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Yeah perhaps the issue is both EHP + a destroyer that does close to 700 dps + concord response time.


The usual gank catalysts are very very easy to destroy, just use insta-canes against them, you can one-shot them. That makes them pretty balanced as they trade tank for dps - as it should be.


And the catalysts wouldnt shoot back if you attack them before the gank or do you suggest a fleet of canes in exchange for a fleet of 30 catalysts?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#76 - 2013-07-06 15:38:09 UTC
Spectatoress wrote:
Entertain me and tell whats about competence to bump a freighter off gate/grid, launch an absurdly cheap fleet of Catalysts who is controlled by maybe 6 real Players with isboxer, warp to member, target freighter and press F1 on 3,2,1 Fire


easier said than done

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#77 - 2013-07-06 15:40:12 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Yeah perhaps the issue is both EHP + a destroyer that does close to 700 dps + concord response time.


concord has always been too slow to respond for the pro-themepark crowd

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2013-07-06 15:40:27 UTC
Spectatoress wrote:

And the catalysts wouldnt shoot back if you attack them before the gank or do you suggest a fleet of canes in exchange for a fleet of 30 catalysts?


You can freely shoot them after they initiated their attack. Or you could have a fleet of griffins ready to jam them out once they go GCC. A single griffin should be able to lock-down 2 catalysts. The tools to defend your ship are there, use them.
Spectatoress
Doomheim
#79 - 2013-07-06 15:40:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Spectatoress
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:

and yet despite how easy it is claimed to be, its still absurdly rare


But not because its incredibly difficult. Because its incredibly boring and it seems that not that many EVE-Players
in HighSec are of no other use than that like the member of ... lets say .... Bat Country? Lol
Spectatoress
Doomheim
#80 - 2013-07-06 15:46:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Spectatoress
Andski wrote:
Spectatoress wrote:
Entertain me and tell whats about competence to bump a freighter off gate/grid, launch an absurdly cheap fleet of Catalysts who is controlled by maybe 6 real Players with isboxer, warp to member, target freighter and press F1 on 3,2,1 Fire


easier said than done


Maybe you should check with Seraphin Foad ... he may tell you how easy it is.
Or just check his videos. P