These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#1141 - 2014-07-02 18:25:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Last night I finally had the time to go to Kamio, where I sat and watched Code go to play. The Idiocy amongst the mining community there was outstanding.

To watch Code in action is quite relaxing. Now I find ganking miners to be distasteful, but really. Those that are ganked thoroughly deserve it. Mining even when Gankers are in system, just shows the level of stupid in the game.

I knew stupid existed in the game, but not to this extent. I am almost ashamed to call myself a miner. Hats of to you Code, I might not like what you do, But by watching you in action you have earned my respect.



o7


When we ran our caldari ice interdiction we killed about 600 macks in two weeks. Despite having a month of warning not a single one fitted a tank.

Burn Jita 1 is another fine example of the power of stupid. Plenty of warning, a warning from CCP upon log on, and still they came like moths to the flame.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1142 - 2014-07-02 18:39:48 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
baltec1 wrote:
When we ran our caldari ice interdiction we killed about 600 macks in two weeks. Despite having a month of warning not a single one fitted a tank.


that reminds me, earlier in the thread there was talk about 'defensive' concord spawning being an exploit. i said to another poster i'd ask the gamemasters what the policy was, and ask permission to post the answer in the thread

e: to be clear. i wasn't given permission which is why i'm not copypasting the conversation

*Snip* Please refrain from discussing GM decisions. ISD Ezwal.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#1143 - 2014-07-02 21:38:53 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1144 - 2014-07-02 21:54:07 UTC  |  Edited by: ergherhdfgh
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:

Yet just Red Frog completed over 200,000 contracts last year with next to zero losses. How the hell is that possible?! Could it be that ganks are trivially easy to avoid by competent freighter pilots?


That is an excellent question that I have wondered myself. For all I know Red Frog could be the ones doing the ganking or paying "protection" fees. I mean it makes sense you either gank a whole bunch of freighters on alts or pay someone else to gank freighters that aren't yours then you know that you are safe to afk auto pilot your contract freighters with little to no worries.

If red frog isn't behind this they should be. It would increase the value of their service, increase the use of their service and decrease the number of other's not in their control to feel the need to make freighters feel less safe.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1145 - 2014-07-02 21:59:02 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Yet just Red Frog completed over 200,000 contracts last year with next to zero losses. How the hell is that possible?! Could it be that ganks are trivially easy to avoid by competent freighter pilots?


That is an excellent question that I have wondered myself. For all I know Red Frog could be the ones doing the ganking or paying "protection" fees. I mean it makes sense you either gank a whole bunch of freighters on alts or pay someone else to gank freighters that aren't yours then you know that you are safe to afk auto pilot your contract freighters with little to no worries.

If red frog isn't behind this they should be. It would increase the value of their service, increase the use of their service and decrease the number of other's not in their control to feel the need to make freighters feel less safe.
A-ha! Now you're on to something!

Have you checked the list of James 315's top shareholders..........?

Just sayin'........

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1146 - 2014-07-02 22:02:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:


ergherhdfgh wrote:
When you travel through any of the high 0.5 sec gates on the main pipes you see dozens of gankers sitting there and I know of no ship that can lock up dozens of ships at once so you need wait and see who shoots and wait for them to go red before you can lock and either ECM them or shoot at them in either case they only plan on making it about 15 seconds or so anyway so if you can't even attempt to shoot or jam them for 5 or so seconds you are not taking that ship out of the equation only reducing it's effectiveness.
You don't have to lock dozens of them. You just have to lock 2–3 and nullify them. That's all it takes for the gank to fail. More to the point, if you see a dozen ganker hanging around a gate, you don't have to lock any of them to make the gank fail. All you do is pick another route.



you don't know which 2-3 they are until they start shooting at you. There are choke points in some cases that can not be avoided without going into low sec which I doubt you are advising freighter pilots to do.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1147 - 2014-07-02 22:03:05 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:

Yet just Red Frog completed over 200,000 contracts last year with next to zero losses. How the hell is that possible?! Could it be that ganks are trivially easy to avoid by competent freighter pilots?


That is an excellent question that I have wondered myself. For all I know Red Frog could be the ones doing the ganking or paying "protection" fees. I mean it makes sense you either gank a whole bunch of freighters on alts or pay someone else to gank freighters that aren't yours then you know that you are safe to afk auto pilot your contract freighters with little to no worries.

If red frog isn't behind this they should be. It would increase the value of their service, increase the use of their service and decrease the number of other's not in their control to feel the need to make freighters feel less safe.


Believe you me, it's not them doing it. I have attempted to infiltrate them before, and they are carebears to the core. If you even agree with the concept of ganking you aren't allowed in, and they have a background check that beggars belief for simple hauling.

You need to apply Occam's Razor to this one. Is it that they are part of some gigantic conspiracy, or is that the means and methods by which to avoid ganking that we keep telling people about actually work, and Red Frog does those things?

So... conspiracy, or they're just careful? Take your pick.

"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.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1148 - 2014-07-02 22:05:32 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:

Yet just Red Frog completed over 200,000 contracts last year with next to zero losses. How the hell is that possible?! Could it be that ganks are trivially easy to avoid by competent freighter pilots?


That is an excellent question that I have wondered myself. For all I know Red Frog could be the ones doing the ganking or paying "protection" fees. I mean it makes sense you either gank a whole bunch of freighters on alts or pay someone else to gank freighters that aren't yours then you know that you are safe to afk auto pilot your contract freighters with little to no worries.

If red frog isn't behind this they should be. It would increase the value of their service, increase the use of their service and decrease the number of other's not in their control to feel the need to make freighters feel less safe.


Believe you me, it's not them doing it. I have attempted to infiltrate them before, and they are carebears to the core. If you even agree with the concept of ganking you aren't allowed in, and they have a background check that beggars belief for simple hauling.

You need to apply Occam's Razor to this one. Is it that they are part of some gigantic conspiracy, or is that the means and methods by which to avoid ganking that we keep telling people about actually work, and Red Frog does those things?

So... conspiracy, or they're just careful? Take your pick.
Or... is Kaarous an alt of James 315 who is in alt of Spicy Frog?

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1149 - 2014-07-02 22:09:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
When we ran our caldari ice interdiction we killed about 600 macks in two weeks. Despite having a month of warning not a single one fitted a tank.



Yep, & the Orca's. I got 8 Orca's in 6 hours, some of which were actually tanked, but they all had 1 thing in common: Being AFK.

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.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1150 - 2014-07-02 22:16:00 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:

Yet just Red Frog completed over 200,000 contracts last year with next to zero losses. How the hell is that possible?! Could it be that ganks are trivially easy to avoid by competent freighter pilots?


That is an excellent question that I have wondered myself. For all I know Red Frog could be the ones doing the ganking or paying "protection" fees. I mean it makes sense you either gank a whole bunch of freighters on alts or pay someone else to gank freighters that aren't yours then you know that you are safe to afk auto pilot your contract freighters with little to no worries.

If red frog isn't behind this they should be. It would increase the value of their service, increase the use of their service and decrease the number of other's not in their control to feel the need to make freighters feel less safe.


Believe you me, it's not them doing it. I have attempted to infiltrate them before, and they are carebears to the core. If you even agree with the concept of ganking you aren't allowed in, and they have a background check that beggars belief for simple hauling.

You need to apply Occam's Razor to this one. Is it that they are part of some gigantic conspiracy, or is that the means and methods by which to avoid ganking that we keep telling people about actually work, and Red Frog does those things?

So... conspiracy, or they're just careful? Take your pick.
Or... is Kaarous an alt of James 315 who is in alt of Spicy Frog?


I can't write that well, I haven't the patience.

"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.
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1151 - 2014-07-02 22:33:22 UTC
Tippia wrote:

Even those odds seem insanely high, as in “off by an order of magnitude or three”. Ugh

e: In fact, just looking back the past week, we have one day with a decent number of freighter kills: the 26th. Uedama saw 4 of them, Niarja and surrounding systems saw 7. How many hundreds of freighters pass through those choke points in a single day?


I have to agree with you on this but for a freighter pilot even one loss in 100 is huge since they loose so much with one loss and make so little on one trip. Last that I checked a freighter it's self cost about a Billion and it's not hard to fill them with another Billion in cargo or deposit fee for a contracted load. Loosing 2+ Billion isk when you only stand to make a few million on a load it takes a **** ton of loads to make up for one loss.

The other thing to think about is the gankers are risking nothing. They plan on loosing the ships that they are in. There is no chance they keep it. It's a garunteed loss there is no risk of keeping your ship a calculated expense you could say. They get to pick and choose when where and how much expense they put into the venture and have the chance to make a **** ton.

The freighter pilot on the other hand has everything to loose and very little to gain. The large alliances can afford to loose ships and just consider it part of the expense of doing business. It's the new pilots that are affected the most by this and since you can't tell new pilot from alliance alt since most freighter pilots are in noob corps to avoid war decs.

Again I don't haul stuff often so I don't care much about this and I understand that this type of game play has been around for ever. I'm not even suggesting anything be done about it. All that I am saying is that there is nothing even close to risk versus reward balance on this like CCP claims they aim for. Especially the fact that you are seeing multiple empty freighters being ganked.

Ganking has been in the game since day one it's a huge part of Eve. I don't take issue with that. Freighter pilots have never and will never be safe in Eve. When you fly a freighter it's like painting a big target on your back and they are no fun to fly. That's just the way it is you either learn that the easy way or the hard way. What I do take issue with is when people claim that there is somehow some sort of balance in the ganking mechanics. Concord has never and will never proctect the non-victimizing players. The only people that benefit from concord protection are the players that like to victimize others. That's eve that's how this game is played it's not going to change and posting about it not being fair will change nothing, you will only feed the trolls of which I am probably one.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1152 - 2014-07-02 22:35:59 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
When we ran our caldari ice interdiction we killed about 600 macks in two weeks. Despite having a month of warning not a single one fitted a tank.


that reminds me, earlier in the thread there was talk about 'defensive' concord spawning being an exploit. i said to another poster i'd ask the gamemasters what the policy was, and ask permission to post the answer in the thread

e: to be clear. i wasn't given permission which is why i'm not copypasting the conversation

*Snip* Please refrain from discussing GM decisions. ISD Ezwal.
Since it seems that answer itself was edited out here does this mean to find out we need to individually petition?
Paranoid Loyd
#1153 - 2014-07-02 22:37:15 UTC
Why can't anyone spell lose?

THERE IS ONLY ONE DAMN O!!!

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1154 - 2014-07-02 22:41:05 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Why can't anyone spell lose?

THERE IS ONLY ONE DAMN O!!!
As in:

if they let loose the catalysts

you'll lose your freighter.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1155 - 2014-07-02 22:44:28 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:

The freighter pilot on the other hand has everything to loose and very little to gain.


One would wonder, then, why they continuously refuse to use the numerous and effective preventative measures to keep themselves from exploding. Many of which are detailed in this very thread.


Quote:

The large alliances can afford to loose ships and just consider it part of the expense of doing business. It's the new pilots that are affected the most by this and since you can't tell new pilot from alliance alt since most freighter pilots are in noob corps to avoid war decs.


Oh that's pure horseshit and you know it. New pilots don't have capital ship training, or the 1.4 billion isk to put up for the freighter. New pilots are completely out of the equation.




Quote:
All that I am saying is that there is nothing even close to risk versus reward balance on this like CCP claims they aim for. Especially the fact that you are seeing multiple empty freighters being ganked.


Yeah, there is, actually. Fail to defend yourself, the risk posed by other players just might find you. Fail to fit properly, and you have increased your risk. Stuff your cargohold full of riches, and you have increased your risk.

The freighter pilot, as the person with all the initiative in the equation (ganking for profit is mostly a reactive action) is the person who gets to decide the risk/reward ratio of flying a freighter. The thing is that far too often people chose wrong and still live, since freighter ganking is exceedingly rare. If it were up to me if you ever undock with more than a certain ratio of EHP to isk in cargohold you would just explode and the game would tell you to go back to WoW.

"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.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1156 - 2014-07-02 23:07:42 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
I have to agree with you on this but for a freighter pilot even one loss in 100 is huge since they loose so much with one loss and make so little on one trip. Last that I checked a freighter it's self cost about a Billion and it's not hard to fill them with another Billion in cargo or deposit fee for a contracted load. Loosing 2+ Billion isk when you only stand to make a few million on a load it takes a **** ton of loads to make up for one loss.
The solution to this is to not be greedy. It's 1 in 100 when including the people who massively overload their ships. Remove that anomaly and you'll see the odds shoot up by a few more orders of magnitude.

Quote:
The other thing to think about is the gankers are risking nothing.
Why should we think about something that is blatantly untrue?

Quote:
The freighter pilot on the other hand has everything to loose and very little to gain.
…and a crapton of tools at his disposal to ensure that he doesn't lose everything and just keep the gains from the trip. If he chooses to ignore these tools, then that's his decision, his error, and his problem — not something the game should fix. He was stupid; the game punishes stupidity; everything is as it should be.

Quote:
It's the new pilots that are affected the most by this
If by ”the most” you mean “not in the slightest” then yes. You see, new pilots don't have freighters and they certainly don't have billions worth of cargo to lose. They are not targets for ganks. The only people affected by this are the idiots, the lazy ones, and the extreme gamblers who know the risks but just — entirely correctly — think it most likely won't happen to them. None of those need any additional protection. Quite the opposite.

Quote:
All that I am saying is that there is nothing even close to risk versus reward balance on this like CCP claims they aim for.
It is if you ignore the persistent but thoroughly ignorant and disproven myth that the gankers have little to no risk and instead actually take into account what both they and the target have to do in order for the gank to go off successfully. If anything, the risk very obviously is too low for the hauler when you consider how ridiculously rare it is.
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#1157 - 2014-07-02 23:11:33 UTC
Im too lazy this afternoon to go back and read the thread from where I left off..




Have we all agreed that we need to nerf Highsec yet?

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1158 - 2014-07-02 23:29:32 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Since it seems that answer itself was edited out here does this mean to find out we need to individually petition?

i don't know why that was removed, i thought i'd made sure i wasn't posting anything that might actually be considered private correspondence

the short story is that i did get an answer, and i asked if the gms could post it
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1159 - 2014-07-03 00:57:54 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Since it seems that answer itself was edited out here does this mean to find out we need to individually petition?

i don't know why that was removed, i thought i'd made sure i wasn't posting anything that might actually be considered private correspondence

the short story is that i did get an answer, and i asked if the gms could post it

I was hoping some effort or work duplication could be saved there, oh well, another petition for the GM's is in.
Aalysia Valkeiper
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1160 - 2014-07-03 03:21:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Aalysia Valkeiper
Galaxy Pig wrote:
As a suicide ganker, I'm gonna have to say that my play style is not a problem. please don't nerf it any more.


Hey Galaxy Pig.

I experienced your style of play in an earlier character in Warhou. I'm sure my surname is enough hint whom he was. I sure remember you and your bunch.

One thing my experience with him did. I now mine WITH max yield fit and without worry about gankers. I watch for gankers and leave when they appear.

I never bought plex and thanks to opposing you and your bunch, I developed a system for solo mining that now has me with 100+ ships (in all 4 empires) and over 4 billion isk. I just recently passed a year of playing.

Thanks for the schooling.