These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Hyperdunking nerf on sisi, to the battlements!

First post First post
Author
Aoife Fraoch
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#421 - 2015-10-19 08:51:37 UTC
This thread is now about trying to make Dracvlad look less silly despite himself.
Edriahn
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#422 - 2015-10-19 08:58:33 UTC
Freighter pilots of the High-sec.

You are not safe. No matter how many people are around, or how clear the area looks, no matter what anyone says, no matter what you think, you are not safe. It only takes one second. One second and it's over. Never let your guard down, ever. I want you to promise me.

[20:46:05] Komahal > pl is cancer

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#423 - 2015-10-19 09:11:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Lets try to drag this back on topic.

Dracvlad wrote:
Ganking is hisec is unbalanced, its win win for the gankers and no win for the AG players
What are the tactics that AG players use against gankers, and why are they failing?

Gankers are more than happy to share their methods and may well be willing to help AG hone theirs; at the end of the day we're all playing the same game and the primary purpose of doing so is that it's meant to be fun.

Quote:
my suggestions was to adjust that balance, of course CCP will not do anything like I propose
Have you ever considered that CCP may have already considered proposals such as yours and dismissed them as unworkable or undesirable?

Quote:
their idea of balance is to throw a new expensive ship into the mix that will be easy kills so taht gankers can say you have the tools and don't bother to further stroke their epeens,
Some of your idea of balance is to further enhance an already omnipotent and infallible NPC agency Roll

Quote:
yet you play in a Ganker themepark called hisec.
The closest I've gotten to being ganked was in 2009 when somebody in a cruiser killed the Rifter I was mining in after successfully can baiting me.

In the 6 years since I've not been ganked; despite my, often subjectively awful, posting habits and despite my play-style being that of a gankers prey.

I practice what I preach and it works, at least for me.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Black Pedro
Mine.
#424 - 2015-10-19 09:40:09 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Ganking is hisec is unbalanced, its win win for the gankers and no win for the AG players, my suggestions was to adjust that balance, of course CCP will not do anything like I propose, their idea of balance is to throw a new expensive ship into the mix that will be easy kills so taht gankers can say you have the tools and don't bother to further stroke their epeens, yet you play in a Ganker themepark called hisec.
I am not sure you understand these terms you are throwing around. A 'themepark' is a specific gaming term to describe a video game experience where the player's path is largely determined by the developer. The content is usually scripted and the the choices open to the player are limited so they must follow a predetermined path. Eve missions are a good example of largely themepark content.

Highsec ganking is none of these things. It is an embodiment of the opposite type of gaming experience, the sandbox, where the player can generate content in whatever ways they can think up. Gankers form groups, hunt targets, and effect ganks in whatever ways they choose, in ways that are not necessarily planned by the developer using the emergent rules of the sandbox. Hyperdunking, the nominal topic of this thread, is a good example of this as CCP never intended for the Bowhead to enable this form of freighter ganking. As we all know, when they looked at it they decide that hyperdunking was indeed an emergent tactic and completely legal. Maybe CCP will change that, maybe they won't but it currently is how CCP expects highsec to work.

Highsec is not "unbalanced". CCP intends for their to be risk there which there currently is. Clearly you think you should and couple of your AG associates should be able to shut down the combined effort of dozens or hundreds of highsec gankers, but as any reasonable outsider would agree, that would be unbalanced. You have all the tools already - probably too many tools - to be nearly perfectly safe in highsec and that is enough for game balance. And you are getting yet another with the T2 destroyer.

Ok enough of this. Dracvlad, you said your time "was better spent elsewhere" in Eve than as a anti-ganker, and by extension, whining about ganking on the forums. Shouldn't you go back down to nullsec and shoot some things rather than complaining on the forums about things you said were not important? Freighter ganking isn't a threat remember?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#425 - 2015-10-19 10:01:12 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
What are the tactics that AG players use against gankers, and why are they failing?

Gankers are more than happy to share their methods and may well be willing to help AG hone theirs; at the end of the day we're all playing the same game and the primary purpose of doing so is that it's meant to be fun.
It's not quite so simple though. Ganking is a straightforward task. You need someone to bump, someone to warp the fleet and x dps to lock and fire when told to. It's f1 monkey heaven.

Anti-ganking is more difficult. They can get reppers on board, but the amount repped vs dps amount is such that you need considerably more reppers, and all of those reppers need to be well skilled and in good ships - there's no 1m isk rep ships, pilotable by week old alts that rep anywhere near the damage a catalyst can throw out. Even if they do manage to get enough reppers on board, alpha ganks make them irrelevant.

There's also ECM. Again this requires decent skills and decent ships, and in addition requires a fast lock and a huge amount of coordination to make sure ecm isn't being wasted on the same ships. ECM itself is counterable by a single cheap module on the catalyst and is one of the few chance based mechanics in the game.

Additionally, all anti-ganking requires AGs to land on the ship being ganked before the gank begins in their bigger, slower ships. Gankers then just move on to a secondary target. This is probably the biggest issue for anti-gankers, it's actually getting to the target in time to do anything in the first place. Short of guarding every available target, there's not much they can do. Then after all of that, anti-ganking has no rewards, while ganking is rewarded with a big old pile of loot.

Gankers know this which is why antigankers are a joke and are generally ignored when executing a gank. How they can balance it, I don't know, but making ganking harder and more expensive would be a good start. Requiring individuals to actually be awake rather than just "lock and F1" for larger ganks would be good too.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Mojo Joo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#426 - 2015-10-19 10:02:07 UTC
Chelsea Dagger X wrote:
CODE tears are great.

Code tears are the most tasty tears ever, period. I always enjoy a lot when CCP bring some new ganking nerfs, just to see all that pathetic "tough guys" producing rivers of salty water on forums Twistedhttps://bookhoarding.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/crying.jpg?w=645
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#427 - 2015-10-19 10:08:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Black Pedro wrote:
You have all the tools already - probably too many tools - to be nearly perfectly safe in highsec and that is enough for game balance.
This is what I don't get, the people who actually use the tools in question are generally satisfied with the selection available and their versatility when used appropriately; the people that don't use the tools claim that the selection is too limited and that what they do have is unfit for purpose.

Quote:
And you are getting yet another with the T2 destroyer.
I can pretty much guarantee that former group above will figure out fun and unintended stuff to do with it within hours. The latter group will try a couple of obviously intended things with it, declare it a failure for their purposes and whine on the forums about how ganking has gotten another buff, and CCP should do stuff because reasons.

And thus the circle of fail will continue. I think it's more of a mindset problem than anything else.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#428 - 2015-10-19 10:17:06 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
What are the tactics that AG players use against gankers, and why are they failing?

Gankers are more than happy to share their methods and may well be willing to help AG hone theirs; at the end of the day we're all playing the same game and the primary purpose of doing so is that it's meant to be fun.
It's not quite so simple though. Ganking is a straightforward task. You need someone to bump, someone to warp the fleet and x dps to lock and fire when told to. It's f1 monkey heaven.

Anti-ganking is more difficult. They can get reppers on board, but the amount repped vs dps amount is such that you need considerably more reppers, and all of those reppers need to be well skilled and in good ships - there's no 1m isk rep ships, pilotable by week old alts that rep anywhere near the damage a catalyst can throw out. Even if they do manage to get enough reppers on board, alpha ganks make them irrelevant.

There's also ECM. Again this requires decent skills and decent ships, and in addition requires a fast lock and a huge amount of coordination to make sure ecm isn't being wasted on the same ships. ECM itself is counterable by a single cheap module on the catalyst and is one of the few chance based mechanics in the game.

Additionally, all anti-ganking requires AGs to land on the ship being ganked before the gank begins in their bigger, slower ships. Gankers then just move on to a secondary target. This is probably the biggest issue for anti-gankers, it's actually getting to the target in time to do anything in the first place. Short of guarding every available target, there's not much they can do. Then after all of that, anti-ganking has no rewards, while ganking is rewarded with a big old pile of loot.

Gankers know this which is why antigankers are a joke and are generally ignored when executing a gank. How they can balance it, I don't know, but making ganking harder and more expensive would be a good start. Requiring individuals to actually be awake rather than just "lock and F1" for larger ganks would be good too.


A spot on post, to me it is pretty obvious, to Lucas it is pretty obvious and he ganks.

You lot the gankers, are just unable to jump out of you rhetoric and assess the issues of just how easy it is for gankers and how difficult it is for AG players.

I repeat I see the hisec sandbox as a gankers themepark which is why you can just gank and gank and gank and there is nothing that the hisec players can do about it except just take the hits which is not fun and you are fine with that, the hisec player base has shrunk to those that can take it due to wealth and those that make themselves difficult to gank, all the casual players are no longer playing Eve, I am sure you are happy with that too, maybe CCP is happy about that too, if they are thats pretty suicidal...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#429 - 2015-10-19 10:22:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Black Pedro wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Ganking is hisec is unbalanced, its win win for the gankers and no win for the AG players, my suggestions was to adjust that balance, of course CCP will not do anything like I propose, their idea of balance is to throw a new expensive ship into the mix that will be easy kills so taht gankers can say you have the tools and don't bother to further stroke their epeens, yet you play in a Ganker themepark called hisec.
I am not sure you understand these terms you are throwing around. A 'themepark' is a specific gaming term to describe a video game experience where the player's path is largely determined by the developer. The content is usually scripted and the the choices open to the player are limited so they must follow a predetermined path. Eve missions are a good example of largely themepark content.

Highsec ganking is none of these things. It is an embodiment of the opposite type of gaming experience, the sandbox, where the player can generate content in whatever ways they can think up. Gankers form groups, hunt targets, and effect ganks in whatever ways they choose, in ways that are not necessarily planned by the developer using the emergent rules of the sandbox. Hyperdunking, the nominal topic of this thread, is a good example of this as CCP never intended for the Bowhead to enable this form of freighter ganking. As we all know, when they looked at it they decide that hyperdunking was indeed an emergent tactic and completely legal. Maybe CCP will change that, maybe they won't but it currently is how CCP expects highsec to work.

Highsec is not "unbalanced". CCP intends for their to be risk there which there currently is. Clearly you think you should and couple of your AG associates should be able to shut down the combined effort of dozens or hundreds of highsec gankers, but as any reasonable outsider would agree, that would be unbalanced. You have all the tools already - probably too many tools - to be nearly perfectly safe in highsec and that is enough for game balance. And you are getting yet another with the T2 destroyer.

Ok enough of this. Dracvlad, you said your time "was better spent elsewhere" in Eve than as a anti-ganker, and by extension, whining about ganking on the forums. Shouldn't you go back down to nullsec and shoot some things rather than complaining on the forums about things you said were not important? Freighter ganking isn't a threat remember?


I said it was not the threat I thought it was too the market, which was the reason I decided to do AG stuff, so once I realised taht there was a lot of hisec manufactuers that were going to continue and they would keep the market going, plus the gankers themselves selling the stuff into market I had no reason to stay based on my own self interests.

My interest in the subject is based on the good of the game in terms of revenue for CCP and their failure to cater for casual players and leaving them to be farmed easily in hisec with no way to fight back effectively and I will continue to express my opinion on it, especially as I did some AG action and know just how much it is stacked up against AG players.

As I keep saying the hisec sandbox is a gankers themepark...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#430 - 2015-10-19 10:26:36 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Lets try to drag this back on topic.

Dracvlad wrote:
Ganking is hisec is unbalanced, its win win for the gankers and no win for the AG players
What are the tactics that AG players use against gankers, and why are they failing?

Gankers are more than happy to share their methods and may well be willing to help AG hone theirs; at the end of the day we're all playing the same game and the primary purpose of doing so is that it's meant to be fun.

Quote:
my suggestions was to adjust that balance, of course CCP will not do anything like I propose
Have you ever considered that CCP may have already considered proposals such as yours and dismissed them as unworkable or undesirable?

Quote:
their idea of balance is to throw a new expensive ship into the mix that will be easy kills so taht gankers can say you have the tools and don't bother to further stroke their epeens,
Some of your idea of balance is to further enhance an already omnipotent and infallible NPC agency Roll

Quote:
yet you play in a Ganker themepark called hisec.
The closest I've gotten to being ganked was in 2009 when somebody in a cruiser killed the Rifter I was mining in after successfully can baiting me.

In the 6 years since I've not been ganked; despite my, often subjectively awful, posting habits and despite my play-style being that of a gankers prey.

I practice what I preach and it works, at least for me.


Well done, I have not lost a single ship to gankers either, well apart from one thrasher when I charged into a load of Russians ganking a freighter, but that was actually me going for kills I was not the helpless gank target.

My aim is to make it so that anti-ganking is actually possible to create a more fun environment for hisec players to fight back, you of course just retreated back into rhetoric.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

CCP Explorer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#431 - 2015-10-19 10:29:14 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I am not a C # programmer, and in any case one would need to know the system of the Ai that CCP have developed fully, I read their overview of it and it looked impressive, I think it could handle this easily.
Eve is Python, not C#. You could at least do some research before spouting off about something you're clearly ignorant of.


The new Ai is written in C# for gods sake!
Is it? Admittedly the quote is from 3 years ago, but:

CCP Explorer wrote:

EVE Online is programmed in three languages.

The rendering engine, audio engine, browser, network layer, disk IO, database access, physics simulation and localisation engine are written in C++. Essentially all performance-critical components and access.

All database code is written in T-SQL, Microsoft's extension to SQL, since we use Microsoft SQL Server.

Everything else, in particular all game logic, is written in Stackless Python.
I would assume, I may be wrong as I'm no programmer, that the AI comes under the heading of game logic, which is written in Python.

Nowhere does CCP Explorer mention C#.
Quote is still accurate; it's Stackless Python, T-SQL and C++. Unless you re-define EVE Online to include the websites, which are in C#. We've also been experimenting a bit with Go and a few other languages, but not used them in production code yet.

Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @CCP_Explorer

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#432 - 2015-10-19 10:33:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's not quite so simple though. Ganking is a straightforward task. You need someone to bump, someone to warp the fleet and x dps to lock and fire when told to. It's f1 monkey heaven.
Yeah that's a fair comment and I agree with it, ganking is fairly straightforward in its execution. The hard bit is keeping enough members active to form a fleet on demand. Lets not forget, straightforward as it may be it's also fairly time intensive in terms of man hours, a single freighter gank consumes 1 man hour for every 4 pilots involved; with a fleet of 20 gankers, every kill requires 5 man hours of time.

Quote:
Anti-ganking is more difficult. They can get reppers on board, but the amount repped vs dps amount is such that you need considerably more reppers, and all of those reppers need to be well skilled and in good ships - there's no 1m isk rep ships, pilotable by week old alts that rep anywhere near the damage a catalyst can throw out. Even if they do manage to get enough reppers on board, alpha ganks make them irrelevant.

There's also ECM. Again this requires decent skills and decent ships, and in addition requires a fast lock and a huge amount of coordination to make sure ecm isn't being wasted on the same ships. ECM itself is counterable by a single cheap module on the catalyst and is one of the few chance based mechanics in the game.
I think that part of the problem is that they aren't prepared, or are unable, to field the numbers required. As above a freighter gank fleet of 20 puts in 5 man hours for every gank, successful or not; is it not reasonable to assume that to counter a fleet of that size that AG should be fielding a fleet of similar size/ability or putting in a similar amount of effort?

Quote:
Additionally, all anti-ganking requires AGs to land on the ship being ganked before the gank begins in their bigger, slower ships. Gankers then just move on to a secondary target. This is probably the biggest issue for anti-gankers, it's actually getting to the target in time to do anything in the first place. Short of guarding every available target, there's not much they can do. Then after all of that, anti-ganking has no rewards, while ganking is rewarded with a big old pile of loot.
I can't comment on the first part, I don't know enough about how AG works to do so; with reference to the big fat pile of loot, that is entirely down to the person who decided to undock with it in cargo in the first place.

Quote:
Gankers know this which is why antigankers are a joke and are generally ignored when executing a gank.
There are other reasons that AG is considered a joke, this is but one of them

Quote:
How they can balance it, I don't know, but making ganking harder and more expensive would be a good start. Requiring individuals to actually be awake rather than just "lock and F1" for larger ganks would be good too.
Making ganking harder and more expensive wouldn't overly affect them, as with every other change to their play-style in the past they would adapt and possibly escalate their operations. 6-18 months later, we'd be back with people saying "If only ganking was harder and more expensive", just as we are now.

@Drac if you can keep it on topic I'm willing to take part in a civilised discussion with you, accusing me of rhetoric and ignoring the main question that I was asking is not keeping it on topic.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Aoife Fraoch
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#433 - 2015-10-19 10:36:44 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
What are the tactics that AG players use against gankers, and why are they failing?

Gankers are more than happy to share their methods and may well be willing to help AG hone theirs; at the end of the day we're all playing the same game and the primary purpose of doing so is that it's meant to be fun.
It's not quite so simple though. Ganking is a straightforward task. You need someone to bump, someone to warp the fleet and x dps to lock and fire when told to. It's f1 monkey heaven.

Anti-ganking is more difficult. They can get reppers on board, but the amount repped vs dps amount is such that you need considerably more reppers, and all of those reppers need to be well skilled and in good ships - there's no 1m isk rep ships, pilotable by week old alts that rep anywhere near the damage a catalyst can throw out. Even if they do manage to get enough reppers on board, alpha ganks make them irrelevant.

There's also ECM. Again this requires decent skills and decent ships, and in addition requires a fast lock and a huge amount of coordination to make sure ecm isn't being wasted on the same ships. ECM itself is counterable by a single cheap module on the catalyst and is one of the few chance based mechanics in the game.

Additionally, all anti-ganking requires AGs to land on the ship being ganked before the gank begins in their bigger, slower ships. Gankers then just move on to a secondary target. This is probably the biggest issue for anti-gankers, it's actually getting to the target in time to do anything in the first place. Short of guarding every available target, there's not much they can do. Then after all of that, anti-ganking has no rewards, while ganking is rewarded with a big old pile of loot.

Gankers know this which is why antigankers are a joke and are generally ignored when executing a gank. How they can balance it, I don't know, but making ganking harder and more expensive would be a good start. Requiring individuals to actually be awake rather than just "lock and F1" for larger ganks would be good too.


The engagement window is pretty small really. I think I did see someone propose two tweaks to address that; more fitting options to tank freighters and longer concord response times. Though I suspect what with people being people this still won't lead to ad hoc skirmishes around targets before concord does come in and nuke everyone.

Actually hyper dunking is one example of a banking tactic that did have a longer engagement window giving an opposing force more time to respond. Did it get used?
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#434 - 2015-10-19 10:37:47 UTC
CCP Explorer wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Is it? Admittedly the quote is from 3 years ago, but:

CCP Explorer wrote:

EVE Online is programmed in three languages.

The rendering engine, audio engine, browser, network layer, disk IO, database access, physics simulation and localisation engine are written in C++. Essentially all performance-critical components and access.

All database code is written in T-SQL, Microsoft's extension to SQL, since we use Microsoft SQL Server.

Everything else, in particular all game logic, is written in Stackless Python.
I would assume, I may be wrong as I'm no programmer, that the AI comes under the heading of game logic, which is written in Python.

Nowhere does CCP Explorer mention C#.
Quote is still accurate; it's Stackless Python, T-SQL and C++. Unless you re-define EVE Online to include the websites, which are in C#. We've also been experimenting a bit with Go and a few other languages, but not used them in production code yet.

Your new name is CCP Betelgeuse

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#435 - 2015-10-19 10:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
AG are not prepared and unable to field the numbers, lmao off that is an understatement and a half, how can you prepare when there were 20+ bumpers active all with a freighter stacked up and the gankers just picked the target where there was no AG.

The AG players get nothing out of it apart from doing something hard and resisting, its hardly engaging. As soon as the AG got numbers the Gankers would avoid the AG fleet unless they had enough to alpha the freighter over the reppers and the ECM then they would do it. Often a bumper would keep a protected freighter bumped to tie up a fleet of AG players and go elsewhere, all legitimate stuff, but if you think that results in engaging play for AG players then I have to wonder.

The only gankers putting the hours in was the bumpers.

As I keep pointing out the objective I had was to make it more engaging for the AG players by making it possible to go after the gankers and actually have an impact above saving the odd freighter.

The hisec sandbox is nothing more than a themepark for gankers...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#436 - 2015-10-19 10:47:54 UTC
Aoife Fraoch wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
What are the tactics that AG players use against gankers, and why are they failing?

Gankers are more than happy to share their methods and may well be willing to help AG hone theirs; at the end of the day we're all playing the same game and the primary purpose of doing so is that it's meant to be fun.
It's not quite so simple though. Ganking is a straightforward task. You need someone to bump, someone to warp the fleet and x dps to lock and fire when told to. It's f1 monkey heaven.

Anti-ganking is more difficult. They can get reppers on board, but the amount repped vs dps amount is such that you need considerably more reppers, and all of those reppers need to be well skilled and in good ships - there's no 1m isk rep ships, pilotable by week old alts that rep anywhere near the damage a catalyst can throw out. Even if they do manage to get enough reppers on board, alpha ganks make them irrelevant.

There's also ECM. Again this requires decent skills and decent ships, and in addition requires a fast lock and a huge amount of coordination to make sure ecm isn't being wasted on the same ships. ECM itself is counterable by a single cheap module on the catalyst and is one of the few chance based mechanics in the game.

Additionally, all anti-ganking requires AGs to land on the ship being ganked before the gank begins in their bigger, slower ships. Gankers then just move on to a secondary target. This is probably the biggest issue for anti-gankers, it's actually getting to the target in time to do anything in the first place. Short of guarding every available target, there's not much they can do. Then after all of that, anti-ganking has no rewards, while ganking is rewarded with a big old pile of loot.

Gankers know this which is why antigankers are a joke and are generally ignored when executing a gank. How they can balance it, I don't know, but making ganking harder and more expensive would be a good start. Requiring individuals to actually be awake rather than just "lock and F1" for larger ganks would be good too.


The engagement window is pretty small really. I think I did see someone propose two tweaks to address that; more fitting options to tank freighters and longer concord response times. Though I suspect what with people being people this still won't lead to ad hoc skirmishes around targets before concord does come in and nuke everyone.

Actually hyper dunking is one example of a banking tactic that did have a longer engagement window giving an opposing force more time to respond. Did it get used?


I stopped quite a few, it was just a case of patrolling around the pipes, picking up the signs such as a freighter, catalysts, flashy reds, lurking freighter and bowhead then just scan it down. After that get reppers on the freighter and blow up the catalysts, after that a number of things could happen, the freighter would warp out and there was a save, the bumper keeps at it and brings in a gank fleet, or the bumper manages to trick the freighter into accepting a dual with an alt having held him for hours and then blows him up.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#437 - 2015-10-19 10:52:10 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Yeah that's a fair comment and I agree with it, ganking is fairly straightforward in its execution. The hard bit is keeping enough members active to form a fleet on demand. Lets not forget, straightforward as it may be it's also fairly time intensive in terms of man hours, a single freighter gank consumes 1 man hour for every 4 pilots involved; with a fleet of 20 gankers, every kill requires 5 man hours of time.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
I think that part of the problem is that they aren't prepared, or are unable, to field the numbers required. As above a freighter gank fleet of 20 puts in 5 man hours for every gank, successful or not; is it not reasonable to assume that to counter a fleet of that size that AG should be fielding a fleet of similar size/ability or putting in a similar amount of effort?
The problem is that there's a difference between those characters. I can field 5 gankers and they are all alts. Most are traders with basic gun skills. They are easy to field even at the same time, though I tend to run them in pairs with one alpha ganking frigs randomly. It's considerably easier to field more gankers than more AGs. In addition, as there's no reward and much more challenging gameplay involved, far fewer people are willing to dedicate their time to anti-ganking. I've given it a fair crack to understand what it's like from that side, but sod doing that on a regular basis. I'd rather get rewarded for effort.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
I can't comment on the first part, I don't know enough about how AG works to do so; with reference to the big fat pile of loot, that is entirely down to the person who decided to undock with it in cargo in the first place.
Sort of, it's down to target selection. There's always going to be people with loot about, and it really doesn't take much for it to roll into profit. That's why it's done, because it's easy to profit because the costs going in are so low.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
There are other reasons that AG is considered a joke, this is but one of them
I'm sure there are, but this is the main one. Another is certainly that there's a fair number of vocal AGs that are just not very good. There's a simple reason for this. Anyone that has an ounce of sense won't bother trying to be an AG as it's difficult and unrewarding.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Making ganking harder and more expensive wouldn't overly affect them, as with every other change to their play-style in the past they would adapt and possibly escalate their operations. 6-18 months later, we'd be back with people saying "If only ganking was harder and more expensive", just as we are now.
Perhaps, but it's better than leaving it exactly as it is and pretending it's not an issue. At least if you had to commit decent amounts of assets to it and have individual players actions really matter, it would take more effort for the reward.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#438 - 2015-10-19 11:03:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Dracvlad wrote:
AG are not prepared and unable to field the numbers, lmao off that is an understatement and a half, how can you prepare when there were 20+ bumpers active all with a freighter stacked up and the gankers just picked the target where there was no AG.
Misdirection is good tactics, I'm going to paint a theoretical picture here using Uedama as an example.

I believe Uedama has 5 gates and 3 stations giving 8 viable ganking areas, only 3 of which are especially dangerous. In this theoretical picture, gankers have a bumping Machariel staged at 3 of the 5 gates; what is to stop AG using the gankers tactics of already having a warp in (in the form of these Machariels) by closely shadowing those bumping Machariels and using the Dscan to watch for incoming gankers within a range and direction that makes it pretty certain they're headed that way, and providing a warp in to your logi/dps fleets as required?

Quote:
The AG players get nothing out of it apart from doing something hard and resisting, its hardly engaging. As soon as the AG got numbers the Gankers would avoid the AG fleet unless they had enough to alpha the freighter over the reppers and the ECM then they would do it. Often a bumper would keep a protected freighter bumped to tie up a fleet of AG players and go elsewhere, all legitimate stuff, but if you think that results in engaging play for AG players then I have to wonder.
Do you think that waiting out a 15 minute GCC timers for every 2 or 3 minutes that you're undocked, because Concord will kill anything you undock in, is engaging gameplay?

Quote:
The only gankers putting the hours in was the bumpers.
Man hours and hours are not the same thing.

Quote:
As I keep pointing out the objective I had was to make it more engaging for the AG players by making it possible to go after the gankers and actually have an impact above saving the odd freighter.

The hisec sandbox is nothing more than a themepark for gankers...
Do you know what makes ganking engaging, despite spending 90% of the time being docked up due to timers? The people they do it with.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#439 - 2015-10-19 11:04:00 UTC
I tried to get my experienced PvP orientated corp mates to try AG, they did for a while, initially just firing on gankers was fun, but it soon lost its fun factor for them, so we ended doing to low sec and 0.0 roams apart from jumping in on a war to take down Siggy's POS in Niarja. Then Marmite war dec, GTA 5, people did other things and I looked back at my own interests and said nope they are not going to destroy the market so let them get on with it. I just did not find it fun, because most of the time the gankers would avoid us and we at most could only defend one freighter out of the multitude being bumped

I think I FC'd about two actual AG fleets and saved both freighters, but it was hard work.

Hardly engaging stuff, you should speak to mercs about whether they would do protection stuff, like guarding a mining fleet, no chance...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#440 - 2015-10-19 11:09:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
AG are not prepared and unable to field the numbers, lmao off that is an understatement and a half, how can you prepare when there were 20+ bumpers active all with a freighter stacked up and the gankers just picked the target where there was no AG.
Misdirection is good tactics, I'm going to paint a theoretical picture here using Uedama as an example.

I believe Uedama has 5 gates and 3 stations giving 8 viable ganking areas, only 3 of which are especially dangerous. In this theoretical picture, gankers have a bumping Machariel staged at 3 of the 5 gates; what is to stop AG using the gankers tactics of already having a warp in (in the form of these Machariels) by closely shadowing those bumping Machariels and using the Dscan to watch for incoming gankers and providing a warp in to your logi/dps fleets as required?

Quote:
The AG players get nothing out of it apart from doing something hard and resisting, its hardly engaging. As soon as the AG got numbers the Gankers would avoid the AG fleet unless they had enough to alpha the freighter over the reppers and the ECM then they would do it. Often a bumper would keep a protected freighter bumped to tie up a fleet of AG players and go elsewhere, all legitimate stuff, but if you think that results in engaging play for AG players then I have to wonder.
Do you think that waiting out a 15 minute GCC timers for 2 or 3 minutes that you're undocked, because Concord will kill anything you undock in is engaging gameplay?

Quote:
The only gankers putting the hours in was the bumpers.
Man hours and hours are not the same thing.

Quote:
As I keep pointing out the objective I had was to make it more engaging for the AG players by making it possible to go after the gankers and actually have an impact above saving the odd freighter.

The hisec sandbox is nothing more than a themepark for gankers...
Do you know what makes ganking engaging, despite spending 90% of the time being docked up due to timers? The people they do it with.


We are talking about easy to train up gank toons and people who are null sec players with large numbers of accounts, I have two support toons on Dracvlad that could gank, I have one of my other account, would that 15 minutes bother me, nope, therefore the 15 minute GCC means nothing to them. And as you know they undock once in a shuttle or noob ship and that is that in terms of CONCORD effectively. I waited for that then blew up the pod a couple of times, had a couple end up back in null sec, but most of the time no impact.

It was not just Uedama, it was all along the pipe, we would have people shadowing the Macherial's, but there was so many that were actively bumping that we often had to rely on passing intel. The gankers with Hyperdunking as a tool therefore focussed on the Au TZ late US pacific TZ to do their stuff which had very low coverage by AG players.

So you comment about the GCC is wrong, I also know that many of teh gankers were in Goon fleets on their mains at times too.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp