These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Message Regarding "Hyperdunking"

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#381 - 2015-01-28 18:37:38 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


Don't you even dare suggest such a thing, because it would be a lie. Real EVE PVE players aren't powerless victimhood pansies that complain about "oh whoa is me CCP don't like my play style". We are right there in the arena with the PVP jocks doing our thing, THINKING, acting, winning (wining for us is stacking wealth while "pvp players" shake their fists in the air because they can't hold us long enough to kill us).

So again, don't you dare pretend to speak for the (real) EVE PVE community. We aren't in the surrender business like the fake pve forum whine crowd likes to claim we are.


You, mate, have won the internet for today.


Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
It's called balance. It's something different than "If you do PvP, you're good to go; If you dare to PvE, you're ****** and pay for it".

This is a perfect example of the victim mentality at work - "I don't want to PvP, so I shouldn't be forced to, CCP protect me." Guess what? It's up to YOU to protect your assets from loss, regardless of the source of that loss. You don't want to get ganked? Then change your priorities from "Maximum Yield" or "AFK Isk/Hour" to "Protecting my Assets". The advice on how to do so has not changed, and is freely available. Hell, even the gankers will tell you how to better protcet yourself, if you ask without being a whiny ***** about it.

Out mining? Get someone to watch local, and someone else in fleet to watch dscan. When the usual suspects appear, dock up. Don't give them easy targets. Moving freight? Use a scout or a webber (preferably both). Check zkill to see if ganking crews are active in the bottleneck systems. GO A DIFFERENT WAY if one is available. Sure it may take longer, but once you focus on the right priority, it matters less.

Protecting yourself is not hard, nor is it some magical skill that only a select few possess. Anyone can do it. Does it mean you will never get ganked? No, but your chances go down significantly, if you're the harder of the available targets.

Remember - if we are being chased by a bear in the woods, I don't have to be faster than the bear. I just have to faster than you. The same thinking process applies here. You don't have to be impossible to gank. Just harder to gank than the guy next to you.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#382 - 2015-01-28 18:37:45 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Nothing because my freighter is still being bumped by anything in the game that can fit a MWD Roll
No, what happens is that the ganker gets ganked, the target is repped up, the vultures start showing up, and/or the target just gets away. If you need the fetch more ships, you have long since failed.

You keep stupidly assuming that you have unlimited time, and that drawing things out is somehow a good thing. It is the exact opposite of the truth.



What are you talking about. The ganker and the orca pilot are not the same. The ganker can keep pulling concord with shuttles while the Orca gets a fresh load of cats. The bumper keeps bumping. No vultures come because you are 5 or 6k off grid by now.

What are you even talking about now. Your points are unraveling and becoming desperate.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#383 - 2015-01-28 18:43:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
What are you talking about. The ganker and the orca pilot are not the same. The ganker can keep pulling concord with shuttles while the Orca gets a fresh load of cats. The bumper keeps bumping. No vultures come because you are 5 or 6k off grid by now.
No, that's not how the tactic works, largely because you're using catalysts of all things…
Your answer makes no sense and doesn't really correspond to anything of what I said.

Quote:
What are you even talking about now. Your points are unraveling and becoming desperate.
You're confusing me with you.

Again, you keep assuming that you have unlimited time and that drawing things out is a good thing. This is the exact opposite of the truth. T1 catalysts might work if you have a big fleet, since it'll be over in 20–30 seconds. For jollyjabbing, the slowness of T1 massively increases the risks involved.

There are reasons people ask if you've tried it, and those reasons keep adding up almost every time you post.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#384 - 2015-01-28 18:45:05 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
What are you even talking about now. Your points are unraveling and becoming desperate.
Are they?
I'll leave this here for you.
Annette Nolen wrote:
I wish every gank was a hyperdunk, it's really easy to defend against (1 remote repper and you're 100% safe).

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Alli Ginthur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#385 - 2015-01-28 18:48:18 UTC
Annette Nolen wrote:
Alli Ginthur wrote:
And the difference between one guy using the 50mil of catalysts and the fleet using 50mil of catalysts is... what?


Yeah can we stop dancing around this please?

We all know what the difference is; the final cut per actual person involved (e.g. the human at the keyboard).

One person using three accounts only has to gank targets with sufficient value to get a cut large enough to warrant ONE PERSON involved. A fleet has to gank targets with sufficient value to get a cut large enough for EACH PERSON involved.

But let's boil it down even further so we can approach this simplistically. Let's assume ALL ganks are done by one perfectly rational multiboxing human.

Traditional freighter gank: 1 bumper + (14 or more gank pilots, depending) = 15 accounts to PLEX from the profit

Hyperdunk: 1 bumper + 1 bowhead/orca pilot + 1 gank pilot = 3 accounts to PLEX from the profit

Provided the hyperdunker is able to gank at least once for every five ganks done the traditional way, they will come out even or on top in terms of profit per account. The primary limitation on traditional ganking is not the time to gank, it's the GCC, so while a hyperdunker is not going to gank as frequently as a traditional ganker, they are still very likely going to gank at better than a 1 to 5 rate.

Net effect? Value of a ship worth ganking just got lower.

For the record, I have no problem with this. I wish every gank was a hyperdunk, it's really easy to defend against (1 remote repper and you're 100% safe). But that doesn't invalidate the concerns raised by the above math.

(EDIT: I forgot to spell it out so in case it's not clear, profit is unchanged in either scenario; drop rates are the same and number of cats/material cost to gank is identical or nearly so -- yes this is a slight oversimplification but the addition of one or two cats to deal with passive shield regen on a hyperdunk is balanced by the traditional method likewise requiring more cats than strictly necessary unless you want to borderline fail a bunch of ganks with 3 hull HP remaining on target).


I get the value calculations that have to go into the decision to gank a freighter, and if the gank is strictly for profit, the calculations are valid.

That said, my comment was in response to being told that its now cheaper to gank, when the exact same numbers of ships are needed using either gank method, so taking that snippet out of context makes it seem you're trying to be a bit dishonest here.

Also there are more reasons to gank, outside of ganking for profit, which im sure you are aware of.
Annette Nolen
Perkone
Caldari State
#386 - 2015-01-28 18:54:27 UTC
Alli Ginthur wrote:
That said, my comment was in response to being told that its now cheaper to gank, when the exact same numbers of ships are needed using either gank method, so taking that snippet out of context makes it seem you're trying to be a bit dishonest here.


Well I think it's being ... disingenuous... to pretend that we aren't all aware that people saying "cheaper to gank" really mean "the breakeven/profit point for accounts involved has been lowered", which has a very real effect on target selection. Pretending to think they really meant the actual material cost of ganking has gone down is more fun to troll with I'm sure, but doesn't actually advance the conversation forward much :)
Alli Ginthur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#387 - 2015-01-28 19:03:53 UTC
Annette Nolen wrote:
Alli Ginthur wrote:
That said, my comment was in response to being told that its now cheaper to gank, when the exact same numbers of ships are needed using either gank method, so taking that snippet out of context makes it seem you're trying to be a bit dishonest here.


Well I think it's being ... disingenuous... to pretend that we aren't all aware that people saying "cheaper to gank" really mean "the breakeven/profit point for accounts involved has been lowered", which has a very real effect on target selection. Pretending to think they really meant the actual material cost of ganking has gone down is more fun to troll with I'm sure, but doesn't actually advance the conversation forward much :)


Alli Ginthur wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Zendon Taredi wrote:
I'm okay with this if it comes with a dessie nerf so strong that gankers will be forced to use tier 3. That way they are risking something too, and not just reaping a guaranteed profit.



See thats the thing. I give mad props to ganker fleets who can organize 10 Tornados or Talos and can pop a hauler the right way. Those guys have to set up, scan out and determine the risk/reward of the gank.

But using Cats, or one guy using Cats that will at most cost him 50mil and able to take down anything in the game that can't fight back is insane. There is no risk, because the character is already -10 and throw away and the isk is minuscule.


And the difference between one guy using the 50mil of catalysts and the fleet using 50mil of catalysts is... what?


As you can see from the whole conversation, they were literally talking about material cost. Smile
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#388 - 2015-01-28 19:05:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Annette Nolen wrote:
Well I think it's being ... disingenuous... to pretend that we aren't all aware that people saying "cheaper to gank" really mean "the breakeven/profit point for accounts involved has been lowered", which has a very real effect on target selection. Pretending to think they really meant the actual material cost of ganking has gone down is more fun to troll with I'm sure, but doesn't actually advance the conversation forward much :)

If that's what they mean then that's what they should say. It's not particularly difficult to say “it's easier to gank for (individual) profit”, at which point you'd at least have the beginnings of a leg to stand on, rather than say “it's cheaper to gank”, which is blatantly and categorically untrue.

^^^ And as mentioned, it is often clear that they don't talk about profit, but about actual cost.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#389 - 2015-01-28 19:08:44 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Annette Nolen wrote:
Well I think it's being ... disingenuous... to pretend that we aren't all aware that people saying "cheaper to gank" really mean "the breakeven/profit point for accounts involved has been lowered", which has a very real effect on target selection. Pretending to think they really meant the actual material cost of ganking has gone down is more fun to troll with I'm sure, but doesn't actually advance the conversation forward much :)

If that's what they mean then that's what they say. It's not particularly difficult to say “it's easier to gank for (individual) profit”, at which point you'd at least have the beginnings of a leg to stand on, rather than say “it's cheaper to gank”, which is blatantly and categorically untrue.

^^^ And as mentioned, it is often clear that they don't talk about profit, but about actual cost.



I do believe I said that the difference between cats and tornados was how much the recovery cost was... I said there was little risk using cats because it was cheaper. The reason the risk is lower is because you can fail to gank a few times and still recover your costs.

But like Nolen said, you would rather troll than have a real discussion.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#390 - 2015-01-28 19:13:55 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
I do believe I said
You are not relevant to this particular discussion. You are not the main authority on or a generalisation of the use of “cost” throughout the thread.

It has been said multiple times that this tactic makes it cheaper to gank. That is blatantly and categorically untrue, since the same number of ships (or more) are required, and the cost the same as they ever did (or more).

Quote:
But like Nolen said, you would rather troll than have a real discussion.
Like I said, you are confusing me with you.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#391 - 2015-01-28 19:17:56 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
I do believe I said
You are not relevant to this particular discussion. You are not the main authority on or a generalisation of the use of “cost” throughout the thread.

It has been said multiple times that this tactic makes it cheaper to gank. That is blatantly and categorically untrue, since the same number of ships (or more) are required, and the cost the same as they ever did (or more).

Quote:
But like Nolen said, you would rather troll than have a real discussion.
Like I said, you are confusing me with you.



Hilarious... the ol' I am rubber and you're glue line?!

What Nolen said, albeit more beautifully than me, was that it is more profitable to gank as one guy with 50m in cats because it is split one way. As an extension of that costs are offset by the increased singular split profit.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#392 - 2015-01-28 19:21:41 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Hilarious... the ol' I am rubber and you're glue line?!
If the shoe fits. You keep accusing me of your mistakes. There's no better way of describing without bringing in some rather disturbing implications about dissociative disorders.

Quote:
What Nolen said, albeit more beautifully than me, was that it is more profitable to gank as one guy with 50m in cats because it is split one way.
…and what the rest of us are pointing out is that the cost is the same using this tactic compared to piling the same amount of ships into a fleet. Trying to suggest that ganking has become cheaper is outright wrong, no matter how much you squirm.
Alli Ginthur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#393 - 2015-01-28 19:23:25 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
I do believe I said
You are not relevant to this particular discussion. You are not the main authority on or a generalisation of the use of “cost” throughout the thread.

It has been said multiple times that this tactic makes it cheaper to gank. That is blatantly and categorically untrue, since the same number of ships (or more) are required, and the cost the same as they ever did (or more).

Quote:
But like Nolen said, you would rather troll than have a real discussion.
Like I said, you are confusing me with you.



Hilarious... the ol' I am rubber and you're glue line?!

What Nolen said, albeit more beautifully than me, was that it is more profitable to gank as one guy with 50m in cats because it is split one way. As an extension of that costs are offset by the increased singular split profit.


Well... the goalposts were here a second ago... whered they go? Oh? Clear out in left field now? Roll

Cant even own up to you talking directly about ship cost, when your words are quoted a few posts ago? And you're calling Tippia the troll? Yeesh...
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#394 - 2015-01-28 19:24:34 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Hilarious... the ol' I am rubber and you're glue line?!
If the shoe fits. You keep accusing me of your mistakes. There's no better way of describing without bringing in some rather disturbing implications about dissociative disorders.

Quote:
What Nolen said, albeit more beautifully than me, was that it is more profitable to gank as one guy with 50m in cats because it is split one way.
…and what the rest of us are pointing out is that the cost is the same using this tactic compared to piling the same amount of ships into a fleet. Trying to suggest that ganking has become cheaper is outright wrong, no matter how much you squirm.


But no one claimed the actual total cost of ganking was cheaper. No one. Again, the cost of risk, the split profit, the actual reward were all mentioned. If someone used the term Cost, they were not talking about total value. I even went as far as to say 50mil in cats... I didn't say it was suddenly 40mil in cats now, or 10mil in cats.

Your natural defense for being picked apart is to pull in dissociative disorders, of which you probably know nothing about.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#395 - 2015-01-28 19:25:50 UTC
Alli Ginthur wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
I do believe I said
You are not relevant to this particular discussion. You are not the main authority on or a generalisation of the use of “cost” throughout the thread.

It has been said multiple times that this tactic makes it cheaper to gank. That is blatantly and categorically untrue, since the same number of ships (or more) are required, and the cost the same as they ever did (or more).

Quote:
But like Nolen said, you would rather troll than have a real discussion.
Like I said, you are confusing me with you.



Hilarious... the ol' I am rubber and you're glue line?!

What Nolen said, albeit more beautifully than me, was that it is more profitable to gank as one guy with 50m in cats because it is split one way. As an extension of that costs are offset by the increased singular split profit.


Well... the goalposts were here a second ago... whered they go? Oh? Clear out in left field now? Roll

Cant even own up to you talking directly about ship cost, when your words are quoted a few posts ago? And you're calling Tippia the troll? Yeesh...


goalposts... my god. I did talk about ship costs, in terms that 50mil in cats can be used to gank. I never claimed, nor has anyone else that 50mil is less than it was before whatever goal you are setting here.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#396 - 2015-01-28 19:36:55 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
But no one claimed the actual total cost of ganking was cheaper. No one.
Incorrect. Lucas has claimed it multiple times. Anthar stated it outright. Oh, and you did. You've consistently tried to push a far lower price of a gank than is the reality.

Quote:
Again, the cost of risk, the split profit, the actual reward were all mentioned.
…as were the actual cost of the ships being used, as if they somehow got cheaper or fewer through the magic touch of a GM statement.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#397 - 2015-01-28 20:52:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
even went as far as to say 50mil in cats... I didn't say it was suddenly 40mil in cats now, or 10mil in cats.
Where are you getting this 50M figure from? Because you sure as hell aren't ganking a freighter in hisec with 5 T2 fitted Catalysts or 25 T1 fitted Catalysts for that matter, regardless of the technique that's being used to gank.

Quote:
And a T2 fit Cat costs 4x as much as a T1... but only does 20% more damage. So it doesn't take an economics major to figure out the Maths here.
You need to recheck your maths, with a maxed skilled pilot an overheated T1 fitted Cat costing 2M does just under 420DPS without implants and an overheated T2 fitted Cat costing 8M does 680DPS+ without implants; that's considerably more than a 20% increase in damage.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
#398 - 2015-01-28 21:02:52 UTC
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
even went as far as to say 50mil in cats... I didn't say it was suddenly 40mil in cats now, or 10mil in cats.
Where are you getting this 50M figure from? Because you sure as hell aren't ganking a freighter with 5 T2 fitted Catalysts or 25 T1 fitted Catalysts for that matter, regardless of the technique that's being used to gank.

Quote:
And a T2 fit Cat costs 4x as much as a T1... but only does 20% more damage. So it doesn't take an economics major to figure out the Maths here.
You need to recheck your maths, with a maxed skilled pilot a T1 fitted Cat costing 2M does just under 420DPS without implants and a T2 fitted Cat costing 8M does 680DPS+ without implants; that's considerably more than a 20% increase in damage.


680 dps from a 8m ship is hysterical. Should be nerfed to 300ish.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#399 - 2015-01-28 21:07:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Zendon Taredi wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
even went as far as to say 50mil in cats... I didn't say it was suddenly 40mil in cats now, or 10mil in cats.
Where are you getting this 50M figure from? Because you sure as hell aren't ganking a freighter with 5 T2 fitted Catalysts or 25 T1 fitted Catalysts for that matter, regardless of the technique that's being used to gank.

Quote:
And a T2 fit Cat costs 4x as much as a T1... but only does 20% more damage. So it doesn't take an economics major to figure out the Maths here.
You need to recheck your maths, with a maxed skilled pilot a T1 fitted Cat costing 2M does just under 420DPS without implants and a T2 fitted Cat costing 8M does 680DPS+ without implants; that's considerably more than a 20% increase in damage.


680 dps from a 8m ship is hysterical. Should be nerfed to 300ish.
Those figures are for overheated guns and refer to specialised fits that have zero utility beyond pumping out a shitton of DPS and are being flown by a max skilled pilot, also bear in mind the design parameters of destroyers, which is that of cheap DPS platforms; the clue is in the name of the ship class.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#400 - 2015-01-28 21:13:04 UTC
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Zendon Taredi wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
even went as far as to say 50mil in cats... I didn't say it was suddenly 40mil in cats now, or 10mil in cats.
Where are you getting this 50M figure from? Because you sure as hell aren't ganking a freighter with 5 T2 fitted Catalysts or 25 T1 fitted Catalysts for that matter, regardless of the technique that's being used to gank.

Quote:
And a T2 fit Cat costs 4x as much as a T1... but only does 20% more damage. So it doesn't take an economics major to figure out the Maths here.
You need to recheck your maths, with a maxed skilled pilot a T1 fitted Cat costing 2M does just under 420DPS without implants and a T2 fitted Cat costing 8M does 680DPS+ without implants; that's considerably more than a 20% increase in damage.


680 dps from a 8m ship is hysterical. Should be nerfed to 300ish.
Those figures are for overheated guns and refer to specialised fits that have zero utility beyond pumping out a shitton of DPS and are being flown by a max skilled pilot, also bear in mind the design parameters of destroyers, which is that of cheap DPS platforms; the clue is in the name of the ship class.



No... named T1 fit is 423 dps with CN anti... unheated.

Yes you are right, 20% was an exaggeration, but you still aren't getting 4x the damage from the fit that is 4x more expensive. 423 dps from a 2mil ship...

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.