These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Advice on avoiding the Suicide gank

First post
Author
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#341 - 2014-11-06 07:17:48 UTC
Murauke wrote:
If you are going to gank you should be forced to grind like the rest of us

Such sad. Someone is forcing you to grind? Why would you play a game that feels like a job in the first place. My free time is too valuable for this kind of stuff, if I have time to play I usually do it to have some fun.

Also all the crackpottery in this thread is seriously funny. I can only speak for myself, but apart from exploding and bumping mining ships I have absolutely nothing to do with mining or ore business. When I started I had a budget of 2bil ISK, this has increased within one year to 12bil ISK and this was with solo ganking and bumping alone, without taking advantage of the SRP offered by James 315 or anyone else.

From my experience, the tanked and non-AFK solo Procurer/Skiff pilot is probably the miner who has the lowest risk of being ganked. It usually takes a bunch of gankers to take them down, but then you usually also have the firepower to simply kill the Orca next to them. This pilots have already accepted that Highsec is a dangerous place and have done their homework to protect themselves, which is actually why we do this in the first place.

I never encountered a bot using a high profile setup like a Skiff/Procurer swarm. The bot fleets I encountered in Highsec usually use a bunch of Retrievers which individually operate in the belts and warp back to station to offload their cargo. If you "work" with the miners like we do it is very easy to discover bots because of their behaviour. I ganked whole fleets of them usually even with support of the local miners and reported them to CCP. They will usually vanish a few weeks after the report.

The multiboxer fleets which somehow get called bots in this thread are something completely different. This are the swarms of Procurer/Skiffs usually with Orca and Freighter support. They usually depend on the Orcas corp hangar for the ore/ice transfer to the Freighter. All it takes is a single 100MN Stabber or similar bumper ship to completely disrupt any number of such fleets in a belt. The main bulk of my income actually comes from this kind of disruption gameplay, it's not exactly obvious why, but that does not have to concern you anyway Twisted.

I am sure all the crackpots in this thread with their limited understanding of the game will still claim this is some elaborate scheme to control the market. The truth is usually a lot easier and straight forward.

But maybe I just write this to cover up our real intentions Lol.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#342 - 2014-11-06 07:51:12 UTC
Bull. Bots have been moving away from retrievers for a long time. Funnily enough, the most popular miner botting ship is the venture. Botters don't need huge ore bays because they get isk from being constantly mining, not from being AFK for big blocks of time. You can try to thrash around all you want, but the guys CODE targets, they aren't bots. The reason they respond with tears which you like to post all over your blog isn't because they are some complex crying AI. Players who use retrievers are generally players who want to minimize time between trips so they can multitask.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Syllviaa
Hole Exploitation Inc.
#343 - 2014-11-06 08:51:51 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Bull. Bots have been moving away from retrievers for a long time. Funnily enough, the most popular miner botting ship is the venture..


More botters are getting banned using the Venture because CCP is able to catch them early on. It doesn't mean that the ship is more popular by any means.

RIP Richard A. Butt

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#344 - 2014-11-06 09:39:57 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Bull. Bots have been moving away from retrievers for a long time. Funnily enough, the most popular miner botting ship is the venture. Botters don't need huge ore bays because they get isk from being constantly mining, not from being AFK for big blocks of time. You can try to thrash around all you want, but the guys CODE targets, they aren't bots. The reason they respond with tears which you like to post all over your blog isn't because they are some complex crying AI. Players who use retrievers are generally players who want to minimize time between trips so they can multitask.

According to CCP (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CZR9w3ftjY) Retrievers are second in line after the Venture, after that comes the Mackinaw. So your argument with the ore hold seams to be invalid. I was speaking from personal experience and since I personally don't care much about Ventures I may have a blind spot there. However, I am confident that they are taken care of with such wonderful campaigns like the Venture ganking contest of my wonderful colleague AC.

Also we are not and can't possibly be responsible for the bot population or their actions, this is CCPs domain. And I don't care how OUR actions influence the income or behaviour of a botter, they shouldn't be in the game in the first place. I play this game to play against other human beings, so manly to have fun and not to battle EULA violators. If you like to lead the crusade against the bots you are free to do that, it's your time, but it's not your place to criticise others if they don't think this is a good utilization of their personal free time.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#345 - 2014-11-06 09:59:08 UTC
Hilti Enaka wrote:
Murauke wrote:
No really bothered about this ganking craze but I will say that to pigeon people by saying they are lazy and should be ganked is a bit tiresome when gankers sit in choke/popular systems and get a pay day for no effort what so ever.


Quite like this post that everyone seems to have dodged.


The "no effort" claim is mis-characterizing the amount of work, that at least some people have to do to successfully gank. There are non-trivial amounts of logistics, scouting and planning that are necessary to pull of the ganking of profitable capital haulers, not the mention of the effort to wrangle together dozens of players and the cost of their time. For the pure F1-pushing ganker, the gank itself isn't that difficult, but for the transport logistics, bumpers, FC, and scouts it is work to prepare, identify and hold a target and then pull off a gank successfully.

Solo ganking is much simpler, both on logistics and execution, but is also less profitable. After years of constant nerfs, ganking miners is barely profitable unless you are lucky enough to find a pimped out ship, and while ganking T1 haulers can have a nice payday if someone makes a mistake overloading their hauler, it requires significant patience waiting for your profitable quarry to come to you.

All of this is far from "no effort what so ever". But really, ganking for profit is part of the game, and is there is a near 100% effective counter - don't overload your stuff in undertanked vessels. This is a basic part of the game design. If people fail to obey this rule, then other players are duty-bound to relieve them of their stuff, even if it were "no effort what so ever" for them to do so. That is what provides most of the risk (the only risk?) of operating in highsec.
virm pasuul
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#346 - 2014-11-06 10:31:19 UTC
Buy a permit. Follow the CODE.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#347 - 2014-11-06 10:59:28 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
According to CCP (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CZR9w3ftjY) Retrievers are second in line after the Venture, after that comes the Mackinaw. So your argument with the ore hold seams to be invalid. I was speaking from personal experience and since I personally don't care much about Ventures I may have a blind spot there. However, I am confident that they are taken care of with such wonderful campaigns like the Venture ganking contest of my wonderful colleague AC.
That was the case when retrievers also had a yield advantage, yes, but then they tweaked the barges making the procurer more useful. All you have to do is watch the ice belts get stripped like clockwork by the same people every 4 hours without fail, and you'll see what they are using.

Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Also we are not and can't possibly be responsible for the bot population or their actions, this is CCPs domain. And I don't care how OUR actions influence the income or behaviour of a botter, they shouldn't be in the game in the first place. I play this game to play against other human beings, so manly to have fun and not to battle EULA violators. If you like to lead the crusade against the bots you are free to do that, it's your time, but it's not your place to criticise others if they don't think this is a good utilization of their personal free time.
Then stop claiming to be against "bot aspirant behaviour" and start saying it like it is: You like risk averse ganking against newbies and carebears because you enjoy watching other people get upset about it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

StuRyan
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#348 - 2014-11-06 11:02:29 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Hilti Enaka wrote:
Murauke wrote:
No really bothered about this ganking craze but I will say that to pigeon people by saying they are lazy and should be ganked is a bit tiresome when gankers sit in choke/popular systems and get a pay day for no effort what so ever.


Quite like this post that everyone seems to have dodged.


The "no effort" claim is mis-characterizing the amount of work, that at least some people have to do to successfully gank. There are non-trivial amounts of logistics, scouting and planning that are necessary to pull of the ganking of profitable capital haulers, not the mention of the effort to wrangle together dozens of players and the cost of their time. For the pure F1-pushing ganker, the gank itself isn't that difficult, but for the transport logistics, bumpers, FC, and scouts it is work to prepare, identify and hold a target and then pull off a gank successfully.

Solo ganking is much simpler, both on logistics and execution, but is also less profitable. After years of constant nerfs, ganking miners is barely profitable unless you are lucky enough to find a pimped out ship, and while ganking T1 haulers can have a nice payday if someone makes a mistake overloading their hauler, it requires significant patience waiting for your profitable quarry to come to you.

All of this is far from "no effort what so ever". But really, ganking for profit is part of the game, and is there is a near 100% effective counter - don't overload your stuff in undertanked vessels. This is a basic part of the game design. If people fail to obey this rule, then other players are duty-bound to relieve them of their stuff, even if it were "no effort what so ever" for them to do so. That is what provides most of the risk (the only risk?) of operating in highsec.


Don't kid yourself, it's just sitting waiting and generally being in-active while you wait for someone to pop up. And apparently people who get ganked are being lazy? shut up.
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#349 - 2014-11-06 11:16:26 UTC  |  Edited by: La Rynx
virm pasuul wrote:
Buy a permit. Follow the CODE.


END of commercial break!

Since codies like repetitions so much:
- dont buy a permit.
- ignore codies
- take the proper antigank preparations.

StuRyan wrote:
Don't kid yourself, it's just sitting waiting and generally being in-active while you wait for someone to pop up. And apparently people who get ganked are being lazy? shut up.


Yepp i support that.

Let me quote DJ Entropie Oevert again:
Quote:

the New Order has been busy establishing a presence in ArcheAge. It's only been out a few months and is already infested with carebears who "just want to be left alone" - but never fear, the New Order is there to remind them just what a sandbox is all about :)


Taken from:
http://www.minerbumping.com/2014/11/kills-of-week.html#comment-form

This makes the all allegations like "for the good EvE", "save highsec", etc ad absurdum, a lame joke.
Those guys want just one thing:

Risk averse ganking against newbies and carebears because they enjoy watching other people get upset about it.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#350 - 2014-11-06 11:17:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Then stop claiming to be against "bot aspirant behaviour" and start saying it like it is: You like risk averse ganking against newbies and carebears because you enjoy watching other people get upset about it.


I love how this mindset works.

The people flying around neg ten all day are risk averse, but the people afk in a belt all day totally aren't, because of the first people. 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.

La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#351 - 2014-11-06 11:27:05 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Then stop claiming to be against "bot aspirant behaviour" and start saying it like it is: You like risk averse ganking against newbies and carebears because you enjoy watching other people get upset about it.


I love how this mindset works.

The people flying around neg ten all day are risk averse, but the people afk in a belt all day totally aren't, because of the first people. Roll


Ah now come the legend (propaganda) of the minus ten flyers.
Quote:
sec status can now be bought back for pocket change


You people where talking about it in the free part of the monerbumping.com forum.

I love how simple it is to show where codies are big hypocrits.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#352 - 2014-11-06 11:30:23 UTC
Managing risk, and mitigating consequences does not equate to risk aversion, Lucas.

No matter how much you would like to try and stain ganking with that brush, it only belongs on the people you're defending.

Someone who takes steps to manage risk and mitigate consequences, like a good ganker, has to have first recognized and accepted the results of his actions. And there certainly are; anyone can (and probably should) shoot us, we lose pretty much every ship we undock in that isn't a shuttle, we are endlessly chased by FacPo thereby limiting our ship choices, and our ability to actually profit from our playstyle is almost entirely dependent on the Loot Fairy and the stupidity of others. These are more negative results than almost any other playstyle, certainly than any other that exists in highsec.

But someone who recognizes and accepts risk is not risk averse.

Someone who insists that the risk should not exist in the first place is risk averse.

But I know you won't get the difference, you're bound and determined to be on the wrong side of this. You'll spin some nonsense, and get right back on whatever narrative you've decided to use this week.

"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.
#353 - 2014-11-06 11:31:55 UTC
La Rynx wrote:

You people where talking about it in the free part of the monerbumping.com forum.

I love how simple it is to show where codies are big hypocrits.


Well, I am not part of that forum. But as for "pocket change", if 300 mil is pocket change, then why so butthurt about a few blown up Retrievers?

Oh, and the hypocrite here is not me. But at least I can spell hypocrite.

"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.

Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#354 - 2014-11-06 11:57:23 UTC
Oh c'mon with that careful accepting risks and hard work of ganker. Sit in station, wait for warp in report mark is ready, undock, warp to warp in, shoot, explode, warp pod to safe, dock at station, grab another cat from contract/corp hangar, wait for next warp in. You can do it all day long being flashy red -10.

But please, don't let reality stop you from those glorification speeches.

Invalid signature format

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#355 - 2014-11-06 12:11:30 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I love how this mindset works.

The people flying around neg ten all day are risk averse, but the people afk in a belt all day totally aren't, because of the first people. Roll
OK, please point out where I stated miners weren't risk averse. Go ahead...

Nothing? Oh well perhaps that's because I've not stated that. Gankers do like to go on about how they are playing the right way, while the miners are not, but the truth of the matter is that on both sides it's risk averse play. Both need a serious balancing out.

You may not like the idea of consequences for choices made, but I sure as hell do.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Black Pedro
Mine.
#356 - 2014-11-06 12:12:04 UTC
StuRyan wrote:

Don't kid yourself, it's just sitting waiting and generally being in-active while you wait for someone to pop up. And apparently people who get ganked are being lazy? shut up.


Most people who are ganked are being lazy. To be complete though, they are either lazy, ignorant of the game mechanics, or consciously taking a risk by autopiloting or moving their too-valuable assets in space instead of taking multiple trips. In all three cases they deserve to lose their ships and cargo, and probably their pod as well. This enforces the risk vs. reward design of Eve and is a good thing.

Almost all ganking can be prevented by just paying attention, and not autopiloting or being AFK, and not overloading your ship. If you know this and don't take precautions you are lazy.

As I said before, the only part of a gank team that can at all be inactive is the actual gank ship pilots. Everyone else is constantly searching for targets no matter what type of gank it is. This requires much more attention and effort than AFK hauling or AFK mining.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#357 - 2014-11-06 12:23:49 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Managing risk, and mitigating consequences does not equate to risk aversion, Lucas.
No, but sitting around in highsec in dirt cheap ships which you intend to lose on disposable alts fighting players who are new, terrible or AFK who have no intent on fighting back isn't mitigation of risk. It's aversion. It's actively choosing to avoid risky activities, like fighting people with guns, or fighting in ships you don't intend to lose.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
And there certainly are; anyone can (and probably should) shoot us, we lose pretty much every ship we undock in that isn't a shuttle, we are endlessly chased by FacPo thereby limiting our ship choices, and our ability to actually profit from our playstyle is almost entirely dependent on the Loot Fairy and the stupidity of others.
You ship choices are irrelvant, since the character is an alt. It's not like he needs to fly something that not disposable, because your alts do all of that, so there's no risk there. Flying about in a pod is merely a price of that choice of playstyle, a minimal price.

As for loot, that's no different from any other playstyle choice, it's simply drop chance. You can do exploration and get zip, or you can get billions in drops. It all balances out in the end.

I get that you want to think that gankers are somehow better than miners, but it really isn't the case.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#358 - 2014-11-06 12:26:40 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
In all three cases they deserve to lose their ships and cargo, and probably their pod as well. This enforces the risk vs. reward design of Eve and is a good thing.
I don't disagree, but why do the gankers not have to risk anything? Why should there be very little consequence to ganking, while you demand that all other activities must maintain inherent risk?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Murauke
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#359 - 2014-11-06 12:37:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
In all three cases they deserve to lose their ships and cargo, and probably their pod as well. This enforces the risk vs. reward design of Eve and is a good thing.
I don't disagree, but why do the gankers not have to risk anything? Why should there be very little consequence to ganking, while you demand that all other activities must maintain inherent risk?


I can't work out why, if it's all about valuable assets and apparently lazy AFK pilots why freighter ganks are appearing on KB's where assets have been double wrapped in a courier contract or the cargo is empty?

Keep trying to justify your laziness. At the end of the day you are more guilty of being lazy then perhaps someone who took the time to build up their assets whether that's missioning, ratting, moon reacting or what ever.

Hilti Enaka
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#360 - 2014-11-06 12:42:22 UTC
funny really that I lost a freighter recently after warping to a station at 0 to turn around and head to my outgate but on turning round, got out of range of undock, was passive locked to stop me from safe log off and was bumped to 200km off station to be blapped in Jita.

Yeah I was lazy!