These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Solecist Project
#3201 - 2014-09-01 22:01:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Hengle Teron wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
I can not resist writing this.

You are all delusional!

As I have barely ganked anything lately
there is no evidence that ganking continued at all!

It died with me!

Rest is just CCP pretending it still happens and that guy above is
in fact
a CCP ALT!


*sibs tea*

I can confirm this anecdotal evidence. I haven't seen any gank happen since Sol stopped.

Thank you for confirming this overwhelming evidence! :D




(ppl ... laugh a bit, please...)

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#3202 - 2014-09-01 22:02:20 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

Of course, the mere fact that "somedbody" is ganking ships" does not imply "ganking needs nerfing." But in my mind, if more ships are getting ganked (which I thought was the point of our dispute), and if the ships are not being ganked for isk but for tears (specifically the ganking of empty ships), and if those ships are well fitted, not autopiloted, and operated intelligently, and if we still see them getting ganked, then in my mind there is at least cause to concern some tweaks to the game mechanics. I am 100% fine with undertanked haulers with valuable cargo getting blown off the grid. I am less comfortable with empty freighters being blown up just to make the pilots cry, with the gankers themselves suffering little in the way of consequences.


I count 5 if statements in your short paragraph that you need to provide evidence for.

By the way, of the last 4 Freighters that were ganked, zero of them fitted any tank.

Now, are you willing to accept that Coca Cola is made out of Cheese?


You're better than me. I don't even see that much that requires evidence. "tears" are as good a reason to do something in a video game as anyhting else, in fact, in the grand scheme, it's probably more valid than "internet space money".

Some of us understand that part of playing the game is DENYING other people our 'tears'.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#3203 - 2014-09-01 22:02:59 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Hengle Teron wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
I can not resist writing this.

You are all delusional!

As I have barely ganked anything lately
there is no evidence that ganking continued at all!

It died with me!

Rest is just CCP pretending it still happens and that guy above is
in fact
a CCP ALT!


*sibs tea*

I can confirm this anecdotal evidence. I haven't seen any gank happen since Sol stopped.

Thank you for confirming this overwhelming evidence! :D




(ppl ... laugh a bit, please...)
I too, can confirm this anecdotal evidence. Pirate

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#3204 - 2014-09-01 22:03:42 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

Of course, the mere fact that "somedbody" is ganking ships" does not imply "ganking needs nerfing." But in my mind, if more ships are getting ganked (which I thought was the point of our dispute), and if the ships are not being ganked for isk but for tears (specifically the ganking of empty ships), and if those ships are well fitted, not autopiloted, and operated intelligently, and if we still see them getting ganked, then in my mind there is at least cause to concern some tweaks to the game mechanics. I am 100% fine with undertanked haulers with valuable cargo getting blown off the grid. I am less comfortable with empty freighters being blown up just to make the pilots cry, with the gankers themselves suffering little in the way of consequences.


I count 5 if statements in your short paragraph that you need to provide evidence for.

By the way, of the last 4 Freighters that were ganked, zero of them fitted any tank.

Now, are you willing to accept that Coca Cola is made out of Cheese?


If you look at a lot of the freighters, in addition to having minimal cargo, which should make an attack unlikely, they fitted nanos or int stabs, making it quicker for them to warp out. Bulkheads, which would add hp, are not useful when the gankers routinely pin you down with bumpers and can hit you in multiple waves. You will also see some well tanked orca kills (which also suffered from bumping), which shows that pure ehp is not enough. Right now the combination of massed gankers in Taloses and Brutixes, plus the absue of bumping, makes freighters extremely vulnerable to ganking.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3205 - 2014-09-01 22:07:22 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

Of course, the mere fact that "somedbody" is ganking ships" does not imply "ganking needs nerfing." But in my mind, if more ships are getting ganked (which I thought was the point of our dispute), and if the ships are not being ganked for isk but for tears (specifically the ganking of empty ships), and if those ships are well fitted, not autopiloted, and operated intelligently, and if we still see them getting ganked, then in my mind there is at least cause to concern some tweaks to the game mechanics. I am 100% fine with undertanked haulers with valuable cargo getting blown off the grid. I am less comfortable with empty freighters being blown up just to make the pilots cry, with the gankers themselves suffering little in the way of consequences.


I count 5 if statements in your short paragraph that you need to provide evidence for.

By the way, of the last 4 Freighters that were ganked, zero of them fitted any tank.

Now, are you willing to accept that Coca Cola is made out of Cheese?


You're better than me. I don't even see that much that requires evidence. "tears" are as good a reason to do something in a video game as anyhting else, in fact, in the grand scheme, it's probably more valid than "internet space money".

Some of us understand that part of playing the game is DENYING other people our 'tears'.


I'm perfectly willing to grant that if a large number of empty brick tanked freighters flown with perfectly executed webbers are regularly getting ganked, there's might be a problem.

Just like there might be a problem if Coca Cola is found to be made of Cheese.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
Doomheim
#3206 - 2014-09-01 22:08:01 UTC  |  Edited by: NoLife NoFriends StillPosting
I'm curious if any suicide gankers here have ever thought, upon blowing up someone who obviously thought they were safe, "HAHA! Should have read the forums, sucka!"

Sometimes I imagine this is what they were thinking when I see kills posted of guys who obviously weren't aware of concord response times and what "bumping" is exactly.

Must really suck for that casual hauler who saves up for a freighter, only to have it taken away from him via exploitation of a common lack of knowledge about the game. I'm not sure what would irk me more, losing a freighter where I believed I was safe or the fact that it cost my aggressors nearly nothing and they paid no penalty. It would surely be difficult to continue playing in such a state knowing that you would always be at the mercy of such players. It would be hard to find it worth it.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3207 - 2014-09-01 22:09:30 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
in my mind, if more ships are getting ganked (which I thought was the point of our dispute), and if the ships are not being ganked for isk but for tears (specifically the ganking of empty ships), and if those ships are well fitted, not autopiloted, and operated intelligently, and if we still see them getting ganked, then in my mind there is at least cause to consider some tweaks to the game mechanics.


i don't care.

Veers Belvar wrote:
I am 100% fine with undertanked haulers with valuable cargo getting blown off the grid. I am less comfortable with empty freighters being blown up just to make the pilots cry, with the gankers themselves suffering little in the way of consequences.

provide reasoning. including argument that gankers suffer too little in consequence and that this defecit should be compensated for by game mechanics, not other players. including argument that empty freighters being blown up is a bad thing.
Solecist Project
#3208 - 2014-09-01 22:09:41 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I too, can confirm this anecdotal evidence. Pirate

At this ALARMING RATE of confirmations
we might get CCP to do something about it! :D


(this thread makes me too sad, cheer up!)

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3209 - 2014-09-01 22:09:58 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
If you look at a lot of the freighters, in addition to having minimal cargo, which should make an attack unlikely, they fitted nanos or int stabs, making it quicker for them to warp out. Bulkheads, which would add hp, are not useful when the gankers routinely pin you down with bumpers and can hit you in multiple waves. You will also see some well tanked orca kills (which also suffered from bumping), which shows that pure ehp is not enough. Right now the combination of massed gankers in Taloses and Brutixes, plus the absue of bumping, makes freighters extremely vulnerable to ganking.


Nanos are the incorrect fitting for quick warping a freighter.

Bumping is a normal game mechanic and easily countered.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mag's
Azn Empire
#3210 - 2014-09-01 22:10:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
I'm curious if any suicide gankers here have ever thought, upon blowing up someone who obviously thought they were safe, "HAHA! Should have read the forums, sucka!"

Sometimes I imagine this is what they were thinking when I see kills posted of guys who obviously weren't aware of concord response times and what "bumping" is exactly.

Must really suck for that casual hauler who saves up for a freighter, only to have it taken away from him via exploitation of a common lack of knowledge about the game.
I too play numerous games without knowing how to play, then complain vigorously when I lose and blame the other player.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3211 - 2014-09-01 22:11:06 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
in my mind, if more ships are getting ganked (which I thought was the point of our dispute), and if the ships are not being ganked for isk but for tears (specifically the ganking of empty ships), and if those ships are well fitted, not autopiloted, and operated intelligently, and if we still see them getting ganked, then in my mind there is at least cause to consider some tweaks to the game mechanics.


i don't care.

Veers Belvar wrote:
I am 100% fine with undertanked haulers with valuable cargo getting blown off the grid. I am less comfortable with empty freighters being blown up just to make the pilots cry, with the gankers themselves suffering little in the way of consequences.

provide reasoning. including argument that gankers suffer too little in consequence and that this defecit should be compensated for by game mechanics, not other players. including argument that empty freighters being blown up is a bad thing.

after this. demonstrate that the ganking of empty freighters is too high. and the cause is a fault of game mechanics.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3212 - 2014-09-01 22:12:01 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I too play numerous games without knowing how to play, then complain vigorously when I lose.


But Mag's, Casual

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3213 - 2014-09-01 22:13:15 UTC
So, having a stroll through zkillboard before I head off to work tonight.

Looks like there has been four freigher deaths today that wasn't part of a wardec. And as baltec mentioned, my number was off, which was fairly likely anyway since it was just an off hand I was recalling from memory.

That said, I would love to know how four or five a day is some big freaking deal. That would make them some of the least killed ships in all of EVE, certainly in highsec.

"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.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#3214 - 2014-09-01 22:16:01 UTC
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
I'm curious if any suicide gankers here have ever thought, upon blowing up someone who obviously thought they were safe, "HAHA! Should have read the forums, sucka!"

Sometimes I imagine this is what they were thinking when I see kills posted of guys who obviously weren't aware of concord response times and what "bumping" is exactly.

Must really suck for that casual hauler who saves up for a freighter, only to have it taken away from him via exploitation of a common lack of knowledge about the game.

That is CCP's fault, not the players.

You are basically saying the game should be dumbed down because newer and casual players are not privvy to all the mechanics. That is the nature of something that is complex, and that complexity is what makes EVE so great.

Your concern in warranted up until you begin to assert that game mechanics should change to compensate for ignorance amongst players. The correct solution is to increase the speed in which players learn about the current, working mechanics.

Hey guys.
Solecist Project
#3215 - 2014-09-01 22:18:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Snipe for sexy pic....

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i0c63xav96gz146/asdfsdf.png?dl=0



This thread really needs me. ^_^

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#3216 - 2014-09-01 22:20:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Yes, and I provided strong circumstantial evidence for it. I am not required to spend 300 hours manually tabulating the hard numbers, especially when ze Goons have already done so, but won't release the numbers.


You have provided no such thing. You haven't even presented evidence of a trend over the short term.

And again, it won't take 300 hours, you don't have to manually tabulate it, and the amount of effort it might or might not take to provide evidence for your claims has no bearing on your obligation to provide the evidence.


If you want it so badly feel free to convince our local Goon here to provide it, or consider sending a personal mail to The Mittani.


I'm not making any claims. You are.

You are saying:
"Ganking has increased"
Everyone here is saying:
"Prove it"

Since you're unable to do so, it's quite safe to conclude that you're making things up out of whole cloth.

Or do you also believe that Coca-Cola is made out of Cheese?

The information is available to everyone. At no point in this thread have you, Benny or Mag's proven that ganking has in fact stayed stable or decreased.

Sure the onus is on him to prove his claim... until you guys make half a dozen posts about the topic. You are all willing to invest this much time into telling him "prove it" in various ways; why not invest that time into providing your own statistics to counter his claims?

Personally I've compared August with February, and it certainly seems there is less ganking now than before if we assume those to be accurate representations of their respective time periods. If I wasn't a fundamentally lazy person (slash if I had a dog in this fight) I'd have spent another 10 minutes to gather the stats properly. And we'd be sitting here right now, knowing who's right, instead of bickering back and forth endlessly without actually establishing anything.

So if you guys are willing to spend time making statements against his claims, why are you not willing to spend time proving he's wrong? It seems you guys are more concerned with the "principle" that he should have to prove him own claims, than actually caring about the claims itself. Which would be fine, in a thread about argument structuring, but not so much in a thread about freighter ganking.

To put it more simply, if someone told me "The sky is pink", I wouldn't ask him to prove it. I'd show him a picture of the blue sky and tell him he's wrong.

Hey guys.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3217 - 2014-09-01 22:20:20 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Snipe for sexy pic....

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i0c63xav96gz146/asdfsdf.png?dl=0



This thread really needs me. ^_^


Never stop Soly

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3218 - 2014-09-01 22:21:39 UTC
I wonder which one of them is sock puppeting with the NPC alt?

"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.
Hengle Teron
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#3219 - 2014-09-01 22:22:27 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Snipe for sexy pic....

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i0c63xav96gz146/asdfsdf.png?dl=0



This thread really needs me. ^_^

*cough*

wait, that's not you
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#3220 - 2014-09-01 22:23:50 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Steppa Musana wrote:
The information is available to everyone. At no point in this thread have you, Benny or Mag's proven that ganking has in fact stayed stable or decreased.


I've made no such claim.

Though I easily could, since Miniluv had only been particularly active for a couple months at that point.

Quote:
Sure the onus is on him to prove his claim... until you guys make half a dozen posts about the topic. You are all willing to invest this much time into telling him "prove it" in various ways; why not invest that time into providing your own statistics to counter his claims?


Are you willing to chemically analyze Coca-Cola to prove that it is not made of Cheese?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon