EVE General Discussion

Wait a second, some post ago you wrote:


If you read or listen to James' Manifesto II you should be aware that our goal is to increase the risk and restore the balance CCP destroyed in Highsec. If people leave for Nullsec because of us then everything is working as James intended and the investor of the 400bil got what they payed the money for. If they leave the game because their spaceship exploded then EVE wasn't probably for them anyway.
Our primary motive is not to make profit, but it is helpful to keep the ganking business running. Maybe one day you will understand that ISK alone is meaningless until you do something with it that results in explosions. No one cares how fat your wallet is.


What makes you think we don't scan the cargo? And I already explained why we gank empty Freighters. If you still don't understand why that is then you probably never will, I explained it as simple and clear as I possibly can.

Going to live in a renter corp in nullsec isn't "risk" - you accomplish nothing by doing that. As for highsec, 400 billion isk later itis even worse than when you started. More mining, more bots, etc.....

How do you make a profit? the agents keep any drops? CODE only survives because of new donations...there is no business model...it is a pure loss making organization. Why would you scan cargo if you don't care and will gank anything you can?

I talked about the risk in Highsec not in Nullsec, don't distort what I wrote in order to form easier arguments against my point. It's quite dishonest. Why Nullsec sometimes appears to be safer than Highsec is an entirely different topic and had nothing to do with the points we where discussing.

I also addressed your argument with the more mining in another thread by pointing out that the overall trade volume for minerals is decreasing which strongly suggests that mining is in decline, which you then dodged too as you always do.

Honest people actually address the criticism to their arguments you just go on and fabricate some other baseless argument instead and repeat the old one in another thread or later to dodge some other criticism.

That ganking of Freighters or Barges, the way we do it is not profitable is just an assumption on your part. A wrong assumption btw. You don't have the numbers, you don't have the full picture yet you use your assumptions to create false arguments in a discussions with people who actually know the facts and that you are dead wrong. I mean seriously can you even imagine how ridiculous this looks to us?

This is my final post to you, I am seriously fed up with the way you discuss I don't think there is anything to gain in talking to you. I will block your posts from this moment on. And if you just trolled me.. well done I actually tried to have a discussion.

You claimed "no tangible impact." Listing a couple of specific cases does not a general statement prove.
Anyway, if you actually believed that to be the case, why have you spent a month(+?) here ranting against them?



And yet Code. does make a profit. Just because you don't see it or don't count it as profit doesn't change its nature. (Hint: Where did that 400 billion come from?)



I see, now you just don't know if they scan, where before you knew for certain that they didn't scan.

If you based your arguments on evidence rather than constantly making things up, you wouldn't have to change them so often.

1. CODE's stated goal was to fundamentally alter the risk/reward in highsec and compel people to move low low/null/wh to make isk (consistent with their leader James 315's stated agenda of getting rid of all L3/L4 missions, incursions, and meaningful mining in highsec). The facts clearly show that this has not occurred, and that despite CODE's massive gank investment they have failed to meaningfully change the highsec risk/reward fundamentals.

2. How does Code make a "profit?" To be clear issuing more shares is not "profit," it's just dilution of current shareholders. CODE only has 18 billion isk on hand, and minimal other assets - this does not seem like a profitable venture. From what I can tell most of their investment comes from people who delight in setting Eve on fire, and giggling at the carnage. Their largest shareholder, by far, made his money doubling isk in Jita, and got no financial benefit from CODE activities. There is no evidence that ship manufacturers are backing them (and anyway Uedama is close enough to Jita that it would need to be those active over there, where margins are paper thin). As far as loot drops, those go to the individual agents, and are not fed back into CODE. Were it a business it would now be filing for Chapter 7 liquidation.

3. Why would they scan for cargo if they are content to gank anything that moves as long as they can break the tank? The cargo literally plays no role in their gank/no gank decisions - so why bother scanning?

Oh Trixie....if only you would read up and analyze before posting....

1. This isn't happening. Even with CODE gankfests the risk of bot hauler fleets has actually made hauling CHEAPER. The whol CODE operation is a failure in every conceivable way.

2. The argument here was whether the CODE ganking is profitable in isk terms. I say no, other says yes. Intelligent back and forth ensued. If you actually have something to say with bearing on that, feel free. Pointing out that people may gank at a loss for other reasons (as I contend CODE is doing) is of course true, but irrelevant to the discussion.

3. There is no evidence CODE is doing this. They would always be able to find non-empty freighters in Uedama. Their only concern is apparently finding freighters that are fit with low enough ehp for them to gank.

Please try and do a bit better next time, you make this far too easy for me.

CODE definitely does not scan mining barges but they absolutely do scan the freighters they gank. If there are two targets of opportunity they will go for the one with more cargo. They do in fact scoop the loot, evidenced by them losing a suspect freighter some months ago.

In theory CODE would make a profit off their freighter ganks, however they get a fair amount of attention so I am unsure if they actually do scoop the loot anymore. Seems risky.

They also have no problem ganking freighters of any fit type, as they can keep bumping it and get him on round 2. In fact they seem to take pleasure from going after the higher EHP ones, as a showing that no freighter is safe in EVE without a proper escort (i.e. web-warp). Your claim that they aim for low EHP freighters only is incorrect, that is simply a function of carebears fitting their ships like crap as usual.

I do agree with Veers that the main form of ganking in CODE; miner ganking; is not profitable. A T2 catalyst fit is 10mil, even at 50% drops that's 4.5mil from the Catalyst, leaving 5.5mil needed from the mining barge. Perhaps a Hulk/Coveter could provide that but even then it's just drawing even. Ganking the other classes is always a net loss after enough time.

What I find most incorrect in Veers' posts is the assumption that mineral volume is decreasing because players are using the minerals to build things, but mining itself has increased overall. You have no evidence to suggest that is the case. The evidence you have provided, "The much more relevant metrics are those involving the cost of goods, which would be rising if good supply wasn't outpacing isk supply." fails to consider that the cost of goods in EVE is much more nuanced than that. Market manipulation plays a huge role in the cost of goods, as do other isk faucets and other expenses of players. That is not to say mining is or isn't increasing in frequency, but rather to say as an RL example that the apples changing in price does not necessarily indicate in itself an increase/decrease in the cultivation of apples.