These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

So... getting back to more severe consequnces for Hi-Sec gankers.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#41 - 2016-07-27 11:27:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Tipa Riot wrote:
Can we stop this discussion again and again? Nobody has yet answered the question, why stupidity should be rewarded instead of penalized in this game? Being ganked once is ok, you are learning, ganked twice, bad luck, being ganked over and over again ... maybe you are not suited to this game.


Ho hum, well how about this as an answer, at one point all the mining ships had the tank of a wet paper bag, they were easy to kill with one or two destroyers, Dracvlad not being stupid stopped mining completely until CCP gave me a ship that suited my needs and I could no longer be stupid so I mine again at times.

Freighters were getting bumped for hours on end, with the use of suicide blackbirds to point your freighter even your webber could not get you into warp before they were able to bump resulted in Dracvlad selling his freighters because it was not possible to use them, all the angles were covered. DST's for me.

What do you mean exactly by stupid, is it to stop playing areas of the game because you are too easy to kill? What do you mean about stop being stupid? Be careful where you go wit this in terms of game design / mechanics and being bothered to do stuff....

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
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#42 - 2016-07-27 11:28:34 UTC
WTF is in that Kool Aid?
Seriously? Again? Already?

Why?

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#43 - 2016-07-27 11:33:11 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
WTF is in that Kool Aid?
Seriously? Again? Already?

Why?


Because Falcon...

Sorry could not resist LolTwisted

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
Dark Lord Trump
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#44 - 2016-07-27 11:36:17 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
Comments in bold


Not that I am that interested to read your rant, but you might want to split that out, as it is unreadable...

Split. You can now read my post which is not a rant despite your assumptions.

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#45 - 2016-07-27 11:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
I must admit I like the ability to self destruct the cargo, keep coming up with the ideas. But you do kow that CCP very quickly moved to make large wrecks have more EHP when the AG players started shooting the freighter wrecks...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6578059#post6578059 for some pointers

That's not the reason for the change at all.

The reason for the wreck HP buff was related to requests made because of tactics in null of shooting titan and capital wrecks to prevent looting and wrecks on grid to prevent warpins. The gank wrecks were also mentioned, but then not the main reason the issue was taken up:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=431120

That thread contains a post by CCP Fozzie linking the thread about the change after Endie took the issue up from Anthar's thread:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6312479#post6312479

That then lead to the change:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=467351

It was not because of antigankers at all.

Of course, straight after that change, the damage control was rebalanced to keep the buff/nerf in sync (apparently), so ships, especially freighters became harder to kill:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=468977

That made it easier for AG to prevent ganks, especially the ones at the higher end of value.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#46 - 2016-07-27 11:42:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I must admit I like the ability to self destruct the cargo, keep coming up with the ideas. But you do kow that CCP very quickly moved to make large wrecks have more EHP when the AG players started shooting the freighter wrecks...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6578059#post6578059 for some pointers

That's not the reason for the change at all.

The reason for the wreck HP buff was related to requests made because of tactics in null of shooting titan and capital wrecks to prevent looting:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=431120

That thread contains a post by CCP Fozzie linking the thread about the change after Endie took the issue up from Anthar's thread:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6312479#post6312479

That then lead to the change:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=467351

It was not because of antigankers at all.

Of course, straight after that change, the damage control was rebalanced to keep the buff/nerf in sync (apparently), so ships, especially freighters became harder to kill:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=468977

That made it easier for AG to prevent ganks.


I was very aware of the issue around shooting titan wrecks and the like, which is why the AG players were OK with it, however it was noticeable that as soon as AG started to shot every wreck bang, it came in.

Endie is the CEO of Bat County which was the main Goon ganking corp, why did he take that up? Was it the move to PL perhaps where he could shoot more Supers and Titans? You do know Bat County don't you, baltec1 who said Nice... to this change, yeah and check out who Warr Akini was...

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
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#47 - 2016-07-27 11:43:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
If people want consequences for ganking that go above and beyond those enforced by the game, then it is up to them to provide those consequences.

Unfortunately that requires a knowledge of game mechanics and the expenditure of some effort and is thus unacceptable to those that want CCP to do it for them.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#48 - 2016-07-27 11:47:46 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Endie is the CEO of Bat County which was the main Goon ganking corp, why did he take that up? Was it the move to PL perhaps where he could shoot more Supers and Titans? You do know Bat County don't you, baltec1 is also in them, check out who Warr Akini was...

Drac, you're not the only person who knows the history/nullsec politics etc. of the game. Many people know the details much better than you (and many not as well).

I'm quite familiart with those details. Doesn't change the fact that your claim that AG was responsible for CCP Fozzie's team rebalancing wrecks is not correct. That was an incorrect claim.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#49 - 2016-07-27 11:53:19 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
TheVirus32 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Why don't you cause some consequences? Ganking ships are ironically profitable to gank.


Because the mechanics allows gankers to run away from any consequences, were I to run after your disposable alt (yeah sure, cycling alts is against the rules, but I don't think CCP enforces this kind of rule much - and you don't even really need to cycle if you're a serious ganker), what kind of damage can I do to you? Blow up your cheap destroyer using cheap destroyers? How is that going to make up for the loss of a freighter and it's cargo? Or a 300m barge? These are alts you don't even keep logged on and only undock when you already have a target FFS. If you're ganking for fun you obviously dont care about such ridiculously small ISK losses.

I'm not saying that "ALL TEH CONSEEQUENSEEZ NEED TO COME FROM CONCORD", but some more should come from the game itself, like not being allowed to dock in a NPC station for at least 48H+ in a given system aswell as it's neighbouring systems after a gank - forcing you to make use of citadels ... Allowing ME to be able to fight back through wardecs and citadel takedown. Sure, you might just kick me and my friends arse BAD (we're talking about high sec here) when you defend, but I at least have a CHANCE to dish out some consequences for you being a **** to me and at least I can have some FUN too...


If you wont fight an untanked destroyer you sure as **** won't be trying to take down a Citadel that will hand out punishment in lumps. Seriously, the gank talos a lot use on freighter ganking are very profitable to gank and very catchable. Banning people from taking part in highsec piracy unless they are in a large organisation is not good for the game.



Not one single player has asked for a ban, what they have asked for is meaningful punishment rather than a 15 min tea break. Don't put stuff in that hasn't been mentioned.

As things stand the only answers coming from everyone is not to carry as much..do you really think that would stop it all? Because if it's just about the isk why are there so many miner ganks?


It's not CCP's job to punish players doing things just because you don't want them to. It's yours.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#50 - 2016-07-27 12:03:03 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Endie is the CEO of Bat County which was the main Goon ganking corp, why did he take that up? Was it the move to PL perhaps where he could shoot more Supers and Titans? You do know Bat County don't you, baltec1 is also in them, check out who Warr Akini was...

Drac, you're not the only person who knows the history/nullsec politics etc. of the game. Many people know the details much better than you (and many not as well).

I'm quite familiart with those details. Doesn't change the fact that your claim that AG was responsible for CCP Fozzie's team rebalancing wrecks is not correct. That was an incorrect claim.


The destruction of the wreck issue has been a long open discussion, I posted something on the stupidity of this years ago, and yet just as AG start as a matter of policy shooting wrecks Endie makes his push along with the CSM and its in. Many of us totally accept it as a valid mechanic, but the sudden action after so many years of nothing is suspicious.

Now if you want to go down the rabbit hole, think back on Falcon's interaction yesterday, I have known about his bias towards ganking for a long time, I hardly saw the need to even mention it, but Falcon has to be careful and yesterday due to people quoting previous HTFU stuff he jumped in with two feet.

There is a major perception by many players including myself that CCP goes too far to make it easy for gankers, that interaction by Falcon in terms of Hyperdunking was a major one, I still cannot get over that, it was such a serious mistake, it was as bad as not adjusting the tank of mining ships at the time they increased the damage on destroyers.

Now players can give the benefit of the doubt, but its getting harder and harder, there is a perception that CCP is on the side of gankers. The problem here is that the most glaring issue was the lack of consequences and he closes those threads where it is being asked about in such a brutal fashion when the trolling and griefing came from the HTFU players..

I can acept that the timing is unfortuanate and let it go, but my feeling of CCP's bias towards ganking, no its very very real.

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
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#51 - 2016-07-27 12:08:31 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Many of us totally accept it as a valid mechanic, but the sudden action after so many years of nothing is suspicious.

You're entitled to your suspicion, just as anyone is.

Suspicion alone doesn't make it fact, so it'll be challenged if stated as fact.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#52 - 2016-07-27 12:13:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Many of us totally accept it as a valid mechanic, but the sudden action after so many years of nothing is suspicious.

You're entitled to your suspicion, just as anyone is.

Suspicion alone doesn't make it fact, so it'll be challenged if stated as fact.


Suspicion is too strong a word for it, it is the perception of a majority of people who oppose ganking that CCP makes it too easy for the gankers.

I never went as far as some people in the previous thread, I know how things work in business, people get on well have a bear talk it round, have a slight bias etc., it all adds up however and unless you step back and look at it you can let it go too far. It is the way the world is.

As I said its a perception, not a suspicion. I think a good way to call it is Cronyism...

EDIT: All you have to do is go and read some of the reactions by AG players, their view was that it was pushed by the CSM and certain Null Sec alliances. And Endie was the CEO of the corp that was the most prolific ganker. I was on a break from Eve when it happened...

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
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#53 - 2016-07-27 12:27:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
..it is the perception of a majority of people who oppose ganking that CCP makes it too easy for the gankers.

Of course it is. People who oppose ganking have a bias against ganking, so they are likely to think a whole lot of things that we regularly see posted here:

- it's too easy
- gankers should face more consequence
- there is no risk in ganking
- etc.

It's all subjective, like this thread OP's view.

Just as much on the other side, there are commonly put views that:

- carebears will never be happy. It'll always be 'just one more nerf'
- ganking has been made more difficult in recent years
- it's up to players to create consequence, not mechanics
- etc.

The constant whining of threads like this does nothing in the end, because CCP view ganking as a valid and integral part of the game, but in recent times many people see the opposite of what you claim - there is a view against ganking in some parts of CCP.

That's also just an opinion though.

One thing's for certain. As long as there are carebears and as long as there are gankers, there will always be threads like this. Some people will never be happy, no matter what the mechanics are.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#54 - 2016-07-27 12:31:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
I think your post will be closed soon.

Personally I will not answer with my opinions anymore, I received a "Troll warning" email from ccp and I opened a ticket.

I will be back writing personal opinions as soon as I receive their explanations or apologizes, if I don't receive them I will close my 4 accounts.

Wish you good luck on this topic.

You received a "Troll warning" mail because you have 4 accounts and yet still posted your complaint in an extremely passive-aggressive manner, pretending to be brand new to EVE and just clueless about what was going on.

I did warn you it wouldn't go over well.



@ the OP...you are wasting your breath.

Honestly *some* (not all) of your suggestions are fairly reasonable tweaks that *could* be made if CCP were so inclined, without hurting the game. It would be hard to balance...but even some sort of "trap" loot could be fun - though certainly not with a 100% guaranteed drop rate or anything. Perhaps just the return of mines to the game in some form so you could plant one fast *if* you were paying attention? Not sure...

In any case - there have been *so many* of these threads lately, nobody at any level to do anything is going to take much notice of yours. It is just another thread that is going to spiral out of control and get locked.



edit: Oh yes, and leave the "Real Life" comments out of your arguments in future if you ever want to persuade anybody. It is a GAME.

I am sure *some* of them are bad people in RL, sure...just like *some* miners are horrible people in RL... It really has nothing to do with the game.

Others of them are actually very friendly and helpful if you get to know them - and are in fact quite *good* people in RL - despite their in-game activities.

As they say - don't judge the book by its cover. Especially if you aren't even seeing the cover directly, but are seeing a distorted image of the cover through a virtual, video game environment.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#55 - 2016-07-27 12:43:26 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
..it is the perception of a majority of people who oppose ganking that CCP makes it too easy for the gankers.

Of course it is. People who oppose ganking have a bias against ganking, so they are likely to think a whole lot of things that we regularly see posted here:

- it's too easy
- gankers should face more consequence
- there is no risk in ganking
- etc.

It's all subjective, like this thread OP's view.

Just as much on the other side, there are commonly put views that:

- carebears will never be happy. It'll always be 'just one more nerf'
- ganking has been made more difficult in recent years
- it's up to players to create consequence, not mechanics
- etc.

The constant whining of threads like this does nothing in the end, because CCP view ganking as a valid and integral part of the game, but in recent times many people see the opposite of what you claim - there is a view against ganking in some parts of CCP.

That's also just an opinion though.

One thing's for certain. As long as there are carebears and as long as there are gankers, there will always be threads like this. Some people will never be happy, no matter what the mechanics are.


It is not as simple as that, people who accept ganking and war decs get defined as out and out carebears who are always whining, I come from it having opposed gankers, seen their tricks, their techniques, their use of the mechanics, I have shot them, I have blown up wrecks I have ganked scouts I have repped freighters etc.

From my perspective they are very organised, very well funded and the use mechanics very well, the issue is in the detail.

Eve is all about consequences and yet the gankers use the mechanics to avoid consequences and what consequences there are, are meaningless. Does suggesting that those mechanics be tightened up to give consequences really constitute a whine?

Yes ganking is a valid gameplay, this is not under discussion except that it is projected on us by gankers, what is being discussed by our side at least is the very real lack of consequences around these mechanics and the loop holes that are used to avoid consequences.

So I get told I am whining, but that is a smokescreen, I get told that I don't get Eve, but I do, I play it because it is hard, I get told I want a 100% safe hisec which I don'tr want. I will keep on pointing out the issues and hope that CCP stop being buddy buddy with the gankers, step back and think you know what, this bumping with no consequences is really lame, you know what this ability to loot scoop for the loss of a noob ship is a bit lame, you know what, this 15 minute timer consequence is not worth much is it, as they have Citadels we can ban them from NPC statins, bit more skin in the game etc.

Then again I just saw a pink elephant fly past my window LolCool.

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
Frank Pannon
Emerald Swine Escavations
#56 - 2016-07-27 12:47:29 UTC
OP, this is where ... well where I thought I'd intervene and add my 2 cents.

"Seems the other thread I started was hijacked by people who apparently think in black-and-white terms, and was subsequently closed."

...

"gankers (who lets face it *are* bad people, not only in game, but I'd place good money on their being bad people out of game too.)"


...

These are ony a few of the possibilites to ensure that the worst people in Eve, engaging in the worst sociopathic activities in Eve, are not the most greatly rewarded players. Or at least increases the risk of their attrocious behavior.



You complain about people thinking only in black-and-white terms, than YOU devide the whole EVE population into 2 groups, GOOD and BAD people? Do you see what you did there? No, I have the feeling in your head you are never wrong, and everyone else is always stupid.

May I ask how you achieved this moral high ground that you can cast such a verdict (they are bad people out of game) over people you do not even know? Is CODE part of "Axis of Evil"?


YOU, your shortsightedness, moral ineptitude scare me more than gankers ever will. Gankers do their sheningans in game, whereas you and your way of thinking ... It actually makes my stomach turn a bit.


As far as I understand saying horrible things about people you know nothing about is fine now on the forums, so I should be OK... but just to be safe here is a smiley Big smile
Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
#57 - 2016-07-27 12:56:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucy Lollipops
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
I think your post will be closed soon.

Personally I will not answer with my opinions anymore, I received a "Troll warning" email from ccp and I opened a ticket.

I will be back writing personal opinions as soon as I receive their explanations or apologizes, if I don't receive them I will close my 4 accounts.

Wish you good luck on this topic.

You received a "Troll warning" mail because you have 4 accounts and yet still posted your complaint in an extremely passive-aggressive manner, pretending to be brand new to EVE and just clueless about what was going on.

I did warn you it wouldn't go over well.



@ the OP...you are wasting your breath.

Honestly *some* (not all) of your suggestions are fairly reasonable tweaks that *could* be made if CCP were so inclined, without hurting the game. It would be hard to balance...but even some sort of "trap" loot could be fun - though certainly not with a 100% guaranteed drop rate or anything. Perhaps just the return of mines to the game in some form so you could plant one fast *if* you were paying attention? Not sure...

In any case - there have been *so many* of these threads lately, nobody at any level to do anything is going to take much notice of yours. It is just another thread that is going to spiral out of control and get locked.



edit: Oh yes, and leave the "Real Life" comments out of your arguments in future if you ever want to persuade anybody. It is a GAME.

I am sure *some* of them are bad people in RL, sure...just like *some* miners are horrible people in RL... It really has nothing to do with the game.

Others of them are actually very friendly and helpful if you get to know them - and are in fact quite *good* people in RL - despite their in-game activities.

As they say - don't judge the book by its cover. Especially if you aren't even seeing the cover directly, but are seeing a distorted image of the cover through a virtual, video game environment.


Yes, I paid 4 accounts because it's economically more convenient to do like that using the good offering for new account than to have 2 accounts and pay for 1 alt each.

As a customer I think CCP company should be happy to have a player paying about 50 euros/month of subscriptions.

That said, my accounts are all about 6 months old so I don't deem myself as a long term player.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#58 - 2016-07-27 13:09:24 UTC
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
Yes, I paid 4 accounts because it's economically more convenient to do like that using the good offering for new account than to have 2 accounts and pay for 1 alt each.

As a customer I think CCP company should be happy to have a player paying about 50 euros/month of subscriptions.

That said, my accounts are all about 6 months old so I don't deem myself as a long term player.

OK...1 more time, and then I'm done talking to you. If you keep going you'll get a forum ban soon enough all on your own anyway...


  • 6 months is not a "new" player. You may not be a long-term veteran, but you are no longer "new".

  • If you don't consider yourself to have fairly well mastered the mechanics of the game, there is no point having more than 1 single account - let alone 4 of them...

  • As I keep saying, you weren't really asking a question. You know **** well how the ganking mechanics work by now - I'd venture to say you've been ganked a few times. And even a child can figure out how kill/death ratios work on the killboard...You kill more than what you lose, you get a high ratio...


    • *** You seem to think that CCP owes you a personal apology. Even in your previous thread this was the tone you set - that their game was broken and horrible and that they should grovel and apologize to you because you wasted your money on it...

    And now you demand that they apologize to you, again, because they called you a Troll - and you threaten to unsubscribe your 4 accounts if they don't?.....


    Get over yourself. CCP owes you nothing. Their game is working the way they want it to work - at least regarding this issue. If you don't like it, get the **** out, or at the very least shut the **** up.

    The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

    Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
    Revis Owen
    Krigmakt Elite
    Safety.
    #59 - 2016-07-27 13:29:32 UTC
    Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
    Input from all sides is valid

    Nope. Validity is not a participation trophy that everybody gets for just showing up.

    Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.
    Zanar Skwigelf
    HIgh Sec Care Bears
    Brothers of Tangra
    #60 - 2016-07-27 13:46:43 UTC
    After talking to people that have several alts set up for p4 production, I can see why killing epithals is preferred.

    I don't think there's anything wrong with ganking. Its simply proactive salvaging.

    Seriously tho, considering you can't place bubbles in hi-sec, just fit a cloak. It is more difficult (but not impossible) to get caught flying something with covert ops cloak or a MWD+cloak.