These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Freighter ganks

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#41 - 2013-07-26 10:22:38 UTC
Hello GoodSir wrote:
Why is it that freighters have such low hp that they can get ganked in highsec by a bunch of destroyers?
Because that's all the HP they need, and it really is a lot as it is.

Spurty wrote:
Freighters are fairly un-EVE like ships.

Zero fittings? Talk about boring

Give them all highs,mids,lows and rigs.
I'd prefer not to have my freighters nerfed, thankyouverymuch.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#42 - 2013-07-26 10:26:20 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I actually think that all freighters should have either 2 low or 2 med slots. The base HP should be balanced down to account for it, but by adding one slot, you could choose how to balance your resists. This would just mean gankers need to think about it more.
There are already ways to increase a freighters EHP. Nerfing a freighter doesn't make sense tbh. So no thanks to slots.
You miss the point. EHP can be changed but you will always have the same resist gaps. By making the reists gaps down to player choice, the gankers either need to be lazy and just hit for the highest possible EHP or they have to do their homework and work it out on the fly. The fact that you can google exactly what damage types and how much damage you need to alpha to take down each type of freighter highlights that it's not as dynamic as the rest of the game.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2013-07-26 10:27:46 UTC
Sol Kal'orr wrote:
I wouldn't call 200k "such low hp".


That's true. It's cheap too. You just need a Erebus in your fleet.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#44 - 2013-07-26 10:40:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I actually think that all freighters should have either 2 low or 2 med slots. The base HP should be balanced down to account for it, but by adding one slot, you could choose how to balance your resists. This would just mean gankers need to think about it more.
There are already ways to increase a freighters EHP. Nerfing a freighter doesn't make sense tbh. So no thanks to slots.
You miss the point. EHP can be changed but you will always have the same resist gaps. By making the reists gaps down to player choice, the gankers either need to be lazy and just hit for the highest possible EHP or they have to do their homework and work it out on the fly. The fact that you can google exactly what damage types and how much damage you need to alpha to take down each type of freighter highlights that it's not as dynamic as the rest of the game.
And? It's optimized for it's role. You missed the point that I don't wish to have my freighter nerfed, by adding slots that will make it worse for it's role than current stats.

So use the tools currently provided by CCP and use your brain when transporting loads.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Jorden Ishonen
Doomheim
#45 - 2013-07-26 10:46:16 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I actually think that all freighters should have either 2 low or 2 med slots. The base HP should be balanced down to account for it, but by adding one slot, you could choose how to balance your resists. This would just mean gankers need to think about it more.
There are already ways to increase a freighters EHP. Nerfing a freighter doesn't make sense tbh. So no thanks to slots.
You miss the point. EHP can be changed but you will always have the same resist gaps. By making the reists gaps down to player choice, the gankers either need to be lazy and just hit for the highest possible EHP or they have to do their homework and work it out on the fly. The fact that you can google exactly what damage types and how much damage you need to alpha to take down each type of freighter highlights that it's not as dynamic as the rest of the game.


Adjusting the EHP to be the same as it is now with a full T2 tank would, in essence be a nerf.

-Your freighter character suddenly needs to train a whole bunch of new combat and fitting related skills. While this will make PvPers happy because it encourages more characters to train combat skills, pure industrialists who want to train industrial skills will NOT appreciate added quite a few million skillpoints onto their training plans.

-The ability to fit a bad fit. As it happens right now, freighter pilots get ganked because they make bad choices. Having to have a good fit only increases the bad choices that can be made. Combine that with the fact that such pilots are hardly likely to be fitting gurus in the first place and you're looking at most freighters being WORSE than before.

-Related to the first point, even if someone knows the optimal fit for their freighter, they will suffer an effective loss of EHP until they can train their T2 tank skills (and the fitting skills to fit said tank). Again, freighter pilots will not be happy.

-The ability to make oneself even more of a target. Any of the above situation where EHP is effectively reduced will contribute to this, but you just KNOW that some dumbass is going to pick up officer mods and autopilot around 2,000 PLEXes, thinking himself completely safe. And then he will run into a gank fleet that simply calculated the right amount of ships needed and they will devour his loot pinata.

Right now as thing lay, stupid freighter have a much higher chance of dying than smart ones. Introducing fits to the equation would only give more room for freighter pilot to be stupid. Meanwhile, the effect this would have on gankers would be...well, to keep using Tornados and Thrashers, since those can vary damage just by changing ammo and a simple ship scanner will tell you what the pilot is set to tank against.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#46 - 2013-07-26 10:58:44 UTC
Jorden Ishonen wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I actually think that all freighters should have either 2 low or 2 med slots. The base HP should be balanced down to account for it, but by adding one slot, you could choose how to balance your resists. This would just mean gankers need to think about it more.
There are already ways to increase a freighters EHP. Nerfing a freighter doesn't make sense tbh. So no thanks to slots.
You miss the point. EHP can be changed but you will always have the same resist gaps. By making the reists gaps down to player choice, the gankers either need to be lazy and just hit for the highest possible EHP or they have to do their homework and work it out on the fly. The fact that you can google exactly what damage types and how much damage you need to alpha to take down each type of freighter highlights that it's not as dynamic as the rest of the game.


Adjusting the EHP to be the same as it is now with a full T2 tank would, in essence be a nerf.

-Your freighter character suddenly needs to train a whole bunch of new combat and fitting related skills. While this will make PvPers happy because it encourages more characters to train combat skills, pure industrialists who want to train industrial skills will NOT appreciate added quite a few million skillpoints onto their training plans.

-The ability to fit a bad fit. As it happens right now, freighter pilots get ganked because they make bad choices. Having to have a good fit only increases the bad choices that can be made. Combine that with the fact that such pilots are hardly likely to be fitting gurus in the first place and you're looking at most freighters being WORSE than before.

-Related to the first point, even if someone knows the optimal fit for their freighter, they will suffer an effective loss of EHP until they can train their T2 tank skills (and the fitting skills to fit said tank). Again, freighter pilots will not be happy.

-The ability to make oneself even more of a target. Any of the above situation where EHP is effectively reduced will contribute to this, but you just KNOW that some dumbass is going to pick up officer mods and autopilot around 2,000 PLEXes, thinking himself completely safe. And then he will run into a gank fleet that simply calculated the right amount of ships needed and they will devour his loot pinata.

Right now as thing lay, stupid freighter have a much higher chance of dying than smart ones. Introducing fits to the equation would only give more room for freighter pilot to be stupid. Meanwhile, the effect this would have on gankers would be...well, to keep using Tornados and Thrashers, since those can vary damage just by changing ammo and a simple ship scanner will tell you what the pilot is set to tank against.

At the moment though, it takes absolutely no effort to perform a freighter gank. There's no thinking or consideration involved. You simply grab a fit of the forum, use the pre-calculated "number of ships required" to move out and blap a freighter down. This gives individual freighters no uniqueness in their defense. Adding slots would change that. It would mean that you have to consider not just what freighter it is, but how the resists affect the damage you will inflict using your weapons, and what ammo you would need to use to do it. The way freighters are at the moment, they seem almost like an afterthought than a considered design.



The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#47 - 2013-07-26 10:59:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Lucas Kell wrote:
You miss the point. EHP can be changed but you will always have the same resist gaps. By making the reists gaps down to player choice, the gankers either need to be lazy and just hit for the highest possible EHP or they have to do their homework and work it out on the fly.
Resists make next to no difference because all your EHP is in hull, which could only be changed to a flat percentage using a DC mod.

The problem is that adding the ability to fit a suitcase forces them to reduce the cargo space by 22%, so you get to choose between a ship that can't carry as much but tanks a little bit better or a ship that carries more and is much weaker (and everyone will choose the latter). I prefer to have one that has more HP and can carry more, which will be an impossibility to achieve since slots will require you to choose one over the other.

Quote:
At the moment though, it takes absolutely no effort to perform a freighter gank. There's no thinking or consideration involved.
…which is why it's such a common event and everyone is doing it. Oh wait, it's exceedingly rare, due to the effort and work involved in make it all come together (and that's just the kill — making money from it requires even more).
SlapNuts
Lost Wacko's
#48 - 2013-07-26 11:20:27 UTC

IMO, there is nothing wrong with ganking freighters however, any ship in the game should be able to defend itself against attacks. I think freighters should have some type of defense, maybe some auto turrets that when turned on would hurt some ships but not do so much dmg on bigger ships like a battleship.

Anyway, just a random thought. there
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#49 - 2013-07-26 11:37:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
SlapNuts wrote:

IMO, there is nothing wrong with ganking freighters however, any ship in the game should be able to defend itself against attacks. I think freighters should have some type of defense, maybe some auto turrets that when turned on would hurt some ships but not do so much dmg on bigger ships like a battleship.

Anyway, just a random thought. there

It's called being sensible when you undock. Don't AP/AFK, use an incorp webber to help, don't fill it with stuff in excess of an isk value you feel comfortable risking. The sizeable ehp deters many ganks, it takes organisation to kill a freighter, being sensible will deter many more.

What you're asking for is an armed merchantman, which already exists, it's called a battlebadger.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#50 - 2013-07-26 11:47:27 UTC
SlapNuts wrote:

IMO, there is nothing wrong with ganking freighters however, any ship in the game should be able to defend itself against attacks. I think freighters should have some type of defense, maybe some auto turrets that when turned on would hurt some ships but not do so much dmg on bigger ships like a battleship.

Anyway, just a random thought. there


Not autopiloting with more than a billion in the cargo is defending itself pretty well. Considering that has a 100% success rate to keep someone from ganking you for profit. (revenge or interdiction, that is a different story)

In fact, you know, not being stupid is pretty overpowered, now that I think about it.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Louise Beethoven
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2013-07-26 12:03:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Louise Beethoven
Any suggestions that makes life harder for gankers will be slandered on General Discussion, you're wasting your time
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#52 - 2013-07-26 12:08:05 UTC
Louise Beethoven wrote:
Any suggestions that makes life harder for gankers will be slandered on General Discussion, you're wasting your time


Of course stupid ideas will be called stupid. The solution is for people to stop posting stupid things.

But slander? Not even close. Slander is spoken. In print it's libel.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jorden Ishonen
Doomheim
#53 - 2013-07-26 12:10:06 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


But slander? Not even close. Slander is spoken. In print it's libel.



Jonah Jameson plays EVE?! That...

...would make a TON of sense, actually.
Louise Beethoven
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#54 - 2013-07-26 12:15:52 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Louise Beethoven wrote:
Any suggestions that makes life harder for gankers will be slandered on General Discussion, you're wasting your time


Of course stupid ideas will be called stupid. The solution is for people to stop posting stupid things.


Stupid Ideas according to General Discussion

  • Make it more difficult to do risk-free ganking
  • Make life easier in anyway for 'carebears'


Good Ideas according to General Discussion

  • Nerf high-sec income streams


Have I got it right?
SlapNuts
Lost Wacko's
#55 - 2013-07-26 12:17:08 UTC

lol, i did not say anything about auto-piloting, of course if you are stupid you get blown up.

This game is about risk vs reward, a pilot risks a destroyer to take part in a freighter kill to get some of the spoils is not exactly risking a lot, someone using a Battleship risks more because it will cost him more to achieve this.

Ganking is a big part of empire play but the risk to gank a freighter is just not that great for the pilot taking part in the event. Allowing a freighter to auto-target and auto-shoot pirates attacking his frieghter causes the pirate to also risk more and even out the risk vs reward simply because the pirate now has to bring a bigger fitted ship.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#56 - 2013-07-26 12:38:24 UTC
SlapNuts wrote:

lol, i did not say anything about auto-piloting, of course if you are stupid you get blown up.

This game is about risk vs reward, a pilot risks a destroyer to take part in a freighter kill to get some of the spoils is not exactly risking a lot, someone using a Battleship risks more because it will cost him more to achieve this.

Ganking is a big part of empire play but the risk to gank a freighter is just not that great for the pilot taking part in the event. Allowing a freighter to auto-target and auto-shoot pirates attacking his frieghter causes the pirate to also risk more and even out the risk vs reward simply because the pirate now has to bring a bigger fitted ship.


The risk is 100%. They will die. CONCORD will kill them.

The steps they take to mitigate that risk, on the other hand, is part of why they deserve success. That, and the planning involved, etc.

Between that and the loot fairy possibly screwing you(thereby losing your 150+ mil worth of destroyers for nothing), it's perfectly fair.

Besides that, it boils down to this. Should 15-20 players be unable to kill 1 player, just because that 1 player's ship is expensive? If your answer is yes, quit EVE immediately. I am serious.
Quote:

Stupid Ideas according to General Discussion


Make it more difficult to do risk-free ganking
Make life easier in anyway for 'carebears'



Good Ideas according to General Discussion


Nerf high-sec income streams



Have I got it right?


Nope. Try again please. You have two more guesses to win the Mystery Prize!

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#57 - 2013-07-26 12:45:21 UTC
Louise Beethoven wrote:
Nerf high-sec income streams


This.

Also remove Concord.
SlapNuts
Lost Wacko's
#58 - 2013-07-26 13:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: SlapNuts
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
SlapNuts wrote:

lol, i did not say anything about auto-piloting, of course if you are stupid you get blown up.

This game is about risk vs reward, a pilot risks a destroyer to take part in a freighter kill to get some of the spoils is not exactly risking a lot, someone using a Battleship risks more because it will cost him more to achieve this.

Ganking is a big part of empire play but the risk to gank a freighter is just not that great for the pilot taking part in the event. Allowing a freighter to auto-target and auto-shoot pirates attacking his frieghter causes the pirate to also risk more and even out the risk vs reward simply because the pirate now has to bring a bigger fitted ship.


The risk is 100%. They will die. CONCORD will kill them.

The steps they take to mitigate that risk, on the other hand, is part of why they deserve success. That, and the planning involved, etc.

Between that and the loot fairy possibly screwing you(thereby losing your 150+ mil worth of destroyers for nothing), it's perfectly fair.

Besides that, it boils down to this. Should 15-20 players be unable to kill 1 player, just because that 1 player's ship is expensive? If your answer is yes, quit EVE immediately. I am serious.
Quote:

Stupid Ideas according to General Discussion


Make it more difficult to do risk-free ganking
Make life easier in anyway for 'carebears'



Good Ideas according to General Discussion


Nerf high-sec income streams



Have I got it right?


Nope. Try again please. You have two more guesses to win the Mystery Prize!


A freighter jumps into high sec system and a frig approaches, it scans the freighter, copies the loot, pastes it into a generator that calculates the amount the freight is worth which comes out to be over the amount he knows is a go, he then tells his buddies who are waiting a system or two up the pipe the name and type of freighter, he or someone else get to the next gate and tells the others when the freighter is jumping into the kill system, his friends then warp to the gate and kill the freighter.....

Now I am not sure how some ppl think think this takes a lot of planning, it might be complicated for someone on the short bus but, for most, it is rather simple.

All I am saying is the risk vs reward is a bit out of wack and should be adjusted. The freighter pilot is taking all the risk. The ganker loses a 20m ship and some mods to concord(big deal) and makes a **** load for his loss and the freighter pilot loses Billions.
Louise Beethoven
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2013-07-26 13:52:23 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
[quote=SlapNuts]
lThe risk is 100%. They will die. CONCORD will kill them


Any loss is completely negligible compared to potential rewards. A frickin level 4 mission runner has more risk than this.

You guys are hilarious.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#60 - 2013-07-26 13:52:45 UTC
Quote:
A freighter jumps into high and a frig approaches, it scans the freighter, copies the loot, pastes it into a generator that calculates the amount the freight is worth which comes out to be over the amount he knows is a go, he then tells his buddies who are waiting a system or two up the pipe the name and type of freighter, he or someone else get to the next gate and tells the others when the freighter is jumping into the kill system, his friends then warp to the gate and kill the freighter.....

Now I am not sure how some ppl think think this takes a lot of planning, it might be complicated for someone on the short bus but, for most, it is rather simple.

All I am saying is the risk vs reward is a bit out of wack and should be adjusted. The freighter pilot is taking all the risk. The ganker loses a 20m ship and some mods to concord(big deal) and makes a **** load for his loss and the freighter pilot loses Billions.


The risk vs reward is only out of whack if the freighter pilot decides to make that the case. It's entirely his decision how much cargo to move.

By your same logic, if I have a blinged out Rattlesnake ratting somewhere in Forge, people shouldn't be able to kill me, just because I made it profitable for other people to try and kill me? Bullshit. Pricetag is not a tank, nor should it ever be.

And stupidity has a price, people will gank you and take your stuff. If a freighter pilot gets ganked for profit, it is 100% HIS FAULT. He carried enough that it was profitable to kill him, and someone did. Dangle a piece of steak in front of a wolf, and you blame the wolf for biting?

Furthermore, effort put in by more than one person, is superior to no effort put in by one person.

It takes more planning to gank a freighter than to load one up and afk while you autopilot. More planning currently wins, and it should.

You also failed to answer my question. Why is it unfair to lose a ship 15v1? Wouldn't it be entirely overpowered if a single ship could win a fight vs 15 people who set it up ahead of time?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.