These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#1381 - 2014-07-06 15:34:11 UTC
I noticed this a lot recently, the empty freighter thing. I was looking through the KB and trying to see if any had wars or something dumb like that, but no. Just plain old suicide gank. Don't think there's a solution for the pilot apart from just don't undock it. Though if you fit it for travel with an istab and a nano or two you'll minimise the amount of time you're actually in space, which must logically reduce your chances of getting popped. Otherwise, warpy-cloaky all the way.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1382 - 2014-07-06 15:36:41 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Don't think there's a solution for the pilot apart from just don't undock it.


Really? You can't think of one? "Don't fly a billion isk killmail through an area that has fifty suicide ganks in the last four hours" leaps to mind for starters.

"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.

Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1383 - 2014-07-06 15:41:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
You know what I don't get, I loot some scrap worth 300 isk from some wreck the guy probably doesn't even want, and everyone can blow me to bits for 15 mins, but I go around scanning ships and sizing them up for a loss that can go into the Billions of ISK and no suspect flag, not even for 10 seconds, and the scan is pretty much instant giving the mark no chance to resist. How convenient.

Who comes up with this stuff, everyone knows that in EVE the real fight happens before the shooting starts.


You stole something, the scanner did no harm to anyone.

Thats the difference.


hah! right, scanning is far more suspicious and harmful then stealing some veldspar.

Of course you don't want suspect flags because an actual fight instead of a gank that pretty much is a guaranteed win scares poor little gankbears. Bear

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Dave Stark
#1384 - 2014-07-06 15:43:16 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
You know what I don't get, I loot some scrap worth 300 isk from some wreck the guy probably doesn't even want, and everyone can blow me to bits for 15 mins, but I go around scanning ships and sizing them up for a loss that can go into the Billions of ISK and no suspect flag, not even for 10 seconds, and the scan is pretty much instant giving the mark no chance to resist. How convenient.

Who comes up with this stuff, everyone knows that in EVE the real fight happens before the shooting starts.


You stole something, the scanner did no harm to anyone.

Thats the difference.


hah! right, scanning is far more suspicious and harmful then stealing some veldspar.

Of course you don't want suspect flags because an actual fight instead of a gank that pretty much is a guaranteed win scares poor little gankbears. Bear


suspect flagging cargo/ship scans won't generate actual fights.
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#1385 - 2014-07-06 15:43:22 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Victoria Sin wrote:
Don't think there's a solution for the pilot apart from just don't undock it.


Really? You can't think of one? "Don't fly a billion isk killmail through an area that has fifty suicide ganks in the last four hours" leaps to mind for starters.



Don't be obtuse. You could be the first. There's no way to know. You can't eliminate the risk, only reduce it. But you can't reduce it to zero unless you don't undock it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1386 - 2014-07-06 15:45:04 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
You know what I don't get, I loot some scrap worth 300 isk from some wreck the guy probably doesn't even want, and everyone can blow me to bits for 15 mins, but I go around scanning ships and sizing them up for a loss that can go into the Billions of ISK and no suspect flag, not even for 10 seconds, and the scan is pretty much instant giving the mark no chance to resist. How convenient.

Who comes up with this stuff, everyone knows that in EVE the real fight happens before the shooting starts.


You stole something, the scanner did no harm to anyone.

Thats the difference.


hah! right, scanning is far more suspicious and harmful then stealing some veldspar.

Of course you don't want suspect flags because an actual fight instead of a gank that pretty much is a guaranteed win scares poor little gankbears. Bear


That's the dumbest thing I've heard so far today.

A scanning module costs about fifty thousand isk. It can be fitted to a noobship. If you think it would change anything aside from taking yet another potential set of options away from new players, you're wrong.

The neverending quest of the carebear to "feel better" continues. Roll

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1387 - 2014-07-06 15:52:02 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:


Don't be obtuse. You could be the first. There's no way to know.


Yes, there really is. And you think I'm the one being obtuse? That's rich.

Or are we playing the "freighter pilots can't be expected to know that Perimeter, Aufay, and Uedama are common gank systems" game? They're not new players almost by definition. If they don't know where the common ganking systems are, then they're backflipping stupid.

So yeah, there is plenty of ways to know, there are plenty of ways to get around it too. But the sticking point is that they require, *gasp*, effort.

Quote:

You can't eliminate the risk, only reduce it. But you can't reduce it to zero unless you don't undock it.


No duh you can't eliminate risk without not undocking in the first place. You act like you should be able to.

"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.

Aischa Montagne
Blut-Klauen-Clan
#1388 - 2014-07-06 16:05:18 UTC
I think ganking in general are a problem. Not so much of the ganking act itself but the hole impact on the lifing in high sec.

It is a known fact also stated by various sources ((like CCP)) that Low Sec and 0.0 offer a far better revenue by taking far higher risks. However talking to various Miners that move to 0.0 Space, they claim it is much safer and quiter There. Your Intel is organized and you can mine Stuff at good margins.
However Low is Considered an unordered Place with high risks, in which attacks can apply everywhere.
High Sec is claimed to be a secure Area. Enforced by Concord and Faction Security forces. Industrial Operation in Highsec comes there for with less revenue but at the same time with less Risks.
So far the theoretic view on the Eve universe by some people.

Gankers contradict this philosophy and damgeing this in a enormous way.
1) Moveing out of a system in another system only avoids an attack if you reduce your earnings. So you may go away but at the same time you loose. It is not much but it still is a descion that is more or less a loose loose choice for the miner.
2) Put a bounty on someone. Well the bounty system is a joke when it comes to ganker. I admit I do not know if it is working at all.
3) you can hunt ganker. Yea that works. A lot of them are not smart. To be honest they do the same dump mistakes as their prey. They just think they are on the safe side. But thats again for someone who takes fun in Mining and building not something he wants to do. And you need some courage to risk your ship attanking the bully in your system.

I think the ganking issue is currently a problem that has to be thought on. This problem could be answered by a good bounty market. There is currently no Market. You can bounty hunt, but it is more something of luck. A System that works around Killrights rather then a random bounty. Which is more direct and efficent.

Another point could to reduce the risk by construction defensive Mining Utlities that in order to cut losses. Remeber not every miner is able to fit tanky hauwlers. I think even a procurer in the hand of a fresh minerpilot is no match for a half competent suicide ganker.

Or improve the win in the Ganking risk areas. Currently you have far less risk in 08 system at by only a small drop in your revenue compared to 0.6 or 0.5 regions. And 0.8 is still gankable territory.

I think the problem is currently not out of hands yet, but it needs to be adressed in some form in the near to mid future.
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#1389 - 2014-07-06 16:12:12 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

No duh you can't eliminate risk without not undocking in the first place. You act like you should be able to.


Please grow up.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1390 - 2014-07-06 16:13:50 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

No duh you can't eliminate risk without not undocking in the first place. You act like you should be able to.


Please grow up.


A grown up is someone who accepts and understands that a PvP game has PvP in it. Cool

"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
#1391 - 2014-07-06 16:28:53 UTC
Aischa Montagne wrote:
High Sec is claimed to be a secure Area. Enforced by Concord and Faction Security forces.
I'm going to stop you there. No. Highsec has never been claimed to be a secure area, and it is not being enforced by anything. Highsec is simply an area where aggression comes at a cost — CONCORD is the entity that creates those costs. Now, I know that you hedged this by calling it a “theoretic view by some people”, but that's just it: it's a view people have, and an incorrect one at that. It cannot be the basis for any kind of argument or logic because it is just plain old false.

Quote:
Gankers contradict this philosophy and damgeing this in a enormous way.
No, they don't for the simple reason that the philosophy in question does not exist. It is, as mentioned, just something some people have invented, with no basis in the realities of the game. Just because people have to make compromises does not mean that anything is damaged. In fact, having to find a compromise between two contradictory goals is one of the core obstacles of the game, and in a sense the only proper obstacle the game can provide. Since you set up your own goals, you and you alone are responsible for picking one that compromises as little as possible, and the game mechanics can't (and shouldn't) be an important factor in this.

Quote:
I think the ganking issue is currently a problem that has to be thought on. This problem could be answered by a good bounty market. There is currently no Market. You can bounty hunt, but it is more something of luck. A System that works around Killrights rather then a random bounty. Which is more direct and efficent.
How is it a problem? It's exceedingly rare. It's trivially easy to avoid. It can be treated as a standard financial risk with expected outcomes if you're inclined to just live with it. Just because all the available solutions (and there are many of them) have downside does not mean that it is a problem either — that's just the nature of choice. There are no silver bullets.

Now, I'll give you credit for taking the view that it should be a player solution instead of Yet Another Nerf™, but in doing so, you've stumbled over the actual cause of the problems some people feel they're facing: what you're looking for is pretty much already available, but the ones who are supposed to use these tools choose not to. The problem isn't tools or ability or mechanics. The problem is choice — specifically the adamant refusal to choose to use the tools available for various reasons.

Quote:
Another point could to reduce the risk by construction defensive Mining Utlities that in order to cut losses. Remeber not every miner is able to fit tanky hauwlers. I think even a procurer in the hand of a fresh minerpilot is no match for a half competent suicide ganker.
These already exist, and yes, even a fresh miner can go all defensive and become a hard target. Again, the only issue is that the miners simply don't choose this option, and that's really where the myth comes from: “I choose not to use these methods, therefore the methods don't exist”.
Aischa Montagne
Blut-Klauen-Clan
#1392 - 2014-07-06 18:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Aischa Montagne
Tippia wrote:
Aischa Montagne wrote:
High Sec is claimed to be a secure Area. Enforced by Concord and Faction Security forces.
I'm going to stop you there. No. Highsec has never been claimed to be a secure area, and it is not being enforced by anything. Highsec is simply an area where aggression comes at a cost — CONCORD is the entity that creates those costs. Now, I know that you hedged this by calling it a “theoretic view by some people”, but that's just it: it's a view people have, and an incorrect one at that. It cannot be the basis for any kind of argument or logic because it is just plain old false.

Quote:
Gankers contradict this philosophy and damgeing this in a enormous way.
No, they don't for the simple reason that the philosophy in question does not exist. It is, as mentioned, just something some people have invented, with no basis in the realities of the game. Just because people have to make compromises does not mean that anything is damaged. In fact, having to find a compromise between two contradictory goals is one of the core obstacles of the game, and in a sense the only proper obstacle the game can provide. Since you set up your own goals, you and you alone are responsible for picking one that compromises as little as possible, and the game mechanics can't (and shouldn't) be an important factor in this.


(( I drop out from Aischas view here.

CCP is claiming they make a lot of changes in the sense higher Risk 2 higher revenue.
See Changes in crius.

That is not true for High. The 1-0.8 Systems are quite save. 0.5 System are completly different. I have seen people looseing 30k eHP Procurers there. I think the gain is not worth the risk today.
But at the same time 0.5 Systems are mostly interesting by position. So some Carebears did stop playing, some are frustrated and some simply arranged them self and takeing more logistics as a price for better safety and pulled out of 0.5 System.
Some people stayed takeing the challenge. But what for? The revenue is no match today for the risk you take.

Thats what I am talking about. From Aischas view of course. I hope with this view words it is more clear what Aischa says but can not say since she does know nothing off CCP. Yea I know it is wired, but it is challanging.

It does not matter what you fit, where you go, the game is getting insecure by time. I dont believe that this Information Channel crap or research your route is working for everyone. If I want to do stuff like that I would go into 0.0 space and miner there. A lot of Miner i know they say risk is equal however the "who" is the enemy game is far more relaxing because the Information they need is already prepared.

So most miners simply do not take fun in an enemy they not realy want and nobody is realy takeing care of gankers. There is no balance.
))
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1393 - 2014-07-06 18:26:11 UTC
Sentamon wrote:

hah! right, scanning is far more suspicious and harmful then stealing some veldspar.

Of course you don't want suspect flags because an actual fight instead of a gank that pretty much is a guaranteed win scares poor little gankbears. Bear


Yea, your speaking to the people willing to risk trillions of isk in capital brawls. The only people looking for risk free gameplay are the nerf ganking bears.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1394 - 2014-07-06 18:50:10 UTC
70 pages so far of carebears and gankbears proving they won't undock if it means risking anything of value. Roll

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1395 - 2014-07-06 18:53:11 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
70 pages so far of carebears and gankbears proving they won't undock if it means risking anything of value. Roll
Carebears risk billions every day... they just aren't aware of it, sometimes. Pirate

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Aischa Montagne
Blut-Klauen-Clan
#1396 - 2014-07-06 18:54:25 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
70 pages so far of carebears and gankbears proving they won't undock if it means risking anything of value. Roll

I believe it is a discussion of the inability to understand the other position.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1397 - 2014-07-06 18:59:44 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
70 pages so far of carebears and gankbears proving they won't undock if it means risking anything of value. Roll


Only, gankers do undock. Hence all of the bears exploding.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#1398 - 2014-07-06 19:11:42 UTC
Aischa Montagne wrote:
That is not true for High. The 1-0.8 Systems are quite save. 0.5 System are completly different. I have seen people looseing 30k eHP Procurers there. I think the gain is not worth the risk today.

I disagree. 30k Procurers? You are long enough in the game to know, that a 30k Procurer deserves to diaf. That has nothing to do with risk versus reward.

Also: It's fine to be risk averse. But if you are, you also have to act accordingly. If you don't, it's not CCPs job to fix your individual problems.

Aischa Montagne wrote:
So most miners simply do not take fun in an enemy they not realy want and nobody is realy takeing care of gankers. There is no balance.

Roll

Remove standings and insurance.

Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1399 - 2014-07-06 19:56:20 UTC
Carebears cry, CONCORD protect me.
Gankbears cry, CONCORD protect my high security Alts.

Result is, PvP = 0

Anyone who's played early Lineage 2, and took part in the almost contrant epic battles knows that EVE needs some of the following.

1) Removal of CONCORD, or at the very least reduce the response time by about 1000%.
2) A better flagging system. (group members flag, flags for scanning, and so on.)
3) No safe areas in high security for criminals that destroyed too many ships of people that don't fight back.

Part of the reason the great battles of EVE happen when someone screws up is because everyone is risk averse and everything is a math equasion. It's like watching Math Majors pretend to do battle.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1400 - 2014-07-06 20:58:16 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Carebears cry, CONCORD protect me.
Gankbears cry, CONCORD protect my high security Alts.

Result is, PvP = 0

Anyone who's played early Lineage 2, and took part in the almost contrant epic battles knows that EVE needs some of the following.

1) Removal of CONCORD, or at the very least reduce the response time by about 1000%.
2) A better flagging system. (group members flag, flags for scanning, and so on.)
3) No safe areas in high security for criminals that destroyed too many ships of people that don't fight back.

Part of the reason the great battles of EVE happen when someone screws up is because everyone is risk averse and everything is a math equasion. It's like watching Math Majors pretend to do battle.
An easy solution would be to simply jump through any of the hundreds of gates or wormholes that lead out of that inherently flawed place called highsec.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!