EVE General Discussion

In nullsec, interceptors kill Carriers worth more than a freighter.

Dreads take out Titans worth 50 times their value. Super carriers worth upwards of 30 billion die to sub cap fleets.

ISK tanking is a pointless discussion. It's not something unique to freighters dying to catalysts and Freighter pilot with just a small amount of smarts can almost completely eliminate the possibility of being ganked.

At some point. the person who gets ganked has to accept responsibility for their loss. It's not the fault of the gankers. They are just enjoying the game and good luck to them. They bring risk to hauling that wouldn't otherwise exist at all.

No. Just no.

Using All Level Five in EFT tells me that at best a gank catalyst will put out 666 DPS. Using that and building in a 12% buffer means that the minimal level of cargo value would be about 720 million ISK. Dropping the DPS on average to 525 would mean the cargo value has to be aroun 909 million ISK. And that is just to break even. To build in a bit of a buffer you'd need to probably go up to about 1 billion ISK minimum.

Look Carebear, it is the lack of risk to the ganker that is the problem. There is no profit to be made in hunting them. Now I know you don't want the possibility of someone ganking you for profit but really if you want a safe hi-sec maybe you should go play WOW.

No I want to make it more profitable and therefore more likely to gank gankers. At the moment they use bumping so they can hide until there kill is positioned then they attack in ships that you will get bugger all if you gank. If they had to use cruisers fitted out for damage with a limited time frame on bumping they would have to be out in the open more and a lot more profitable to gank.

At the moment they are more protected than those they are ganking, able to hide in stations until the kill is blocked. So no having to be out in the open and no real isk for people hunting criminals. Ganking is a necessary part of EvE but it is too safe for them atm.

There is plenty of risk, risk there will be no loot, risk we didn't calculate the math on if we could kill it right, risk enough of the fleet gets ecmd that the gank fails or the freighter catches enough reps to live, risk the freighter gets bumped and cats are out of range, risk ships get scrambled on a bounce, risk the looter gets tackled on suspect. I could go on and on... In the end you are full of crap my carebear little friend, you don't give 2 ***** about the risk to the gankers. In the end it is all about the no risk hauling.


A truer thing has never been said before.

Yeah nah that's not what you're after at all.
Get out of hisec.

It's funny to read this, mainly because it's always funny to me to see that people can exhibit the same behaviors in game as politicans do out of it.

One thing people do is try to appear 'moderate' on something, because they know if they display their real hatred of a thing they want to go away or stop, people will just dismiss them as radical idiots. There are lots of real life examples, none of which can be mentioned here because of board rules against political discussion, but you don't have to think very hard to see what some of them are.

The false moderate knows there isn't enough public support and/or votes in their legislature to outright ban the thing they hate, so the try the 'backdoor ban' route ie they start saying "we know it's here to stay but it at least should be regulated a bit better". The real goal is to have the thing so tightly regulated that no one wants to put up with the hassle of doing it, creating a situation where the thing they don't like is still on the books as legal but almost never happens because it's impractical. Thus the term 'banning via the backdoor'.

People who hate ganking (or any of the antagonistic activities that make the EVE ecosystem actually vibrant and interesting, like cloaky camping, awoxxing, scamming, war deccing, bumping, stealing loot in high sec pve sites, even hot dropping) don't actually want it balanced, they (foolishly think they) want it GONE, thinking the game would be a better place if they could play in perfect safety, not having to worry about people they don't like coming to screw with them.

The most ironic part of it all is that if you got rid of the thing they hate, not only would the game decline really fast (because, like real life and movies, it's the NEGATIVE things that are interesting, how many people would watch the news to see an anchor man say "well, no one died, got injured or even had their feeling hurt, now on to weather"?? lol), but THEY THEMSELVES (the backdoor banners) would get bored and move on to another game...that had some form of ganking and sanctioned griefing, because their whole existence revolves around having things to dislike.

In other words, if you got rid of ganking , CODE-style players would stay and find another way to screw with people's emotions while all the carebears would get bored and leave because there is no real challenge for them to face anymore. Life is backwards like that.

I think the question should be "why do NPC stations allow -10 criminals to dock?"

Also at the same time I always wondered why Jita 4-4 lets people who at war with the Caldari state dock up too.

I mean it always seemed odd that they would pursue these targets but yet once they dock, they are on holy ground.

Double post due to typing this on a phone that bugs out.

I've always wondered this myself. Not just with security status but with standings as well. Even when I was in FW, I was in Caldari space while fighting for Gallente, and I warped to dock at a Caldari station. My initial reaction was "OH NO!!" Then that soothing female AI voice came over my headphones, "Docking permission accepted."

And even back then, I thought that was a bit silly. Does anyone have an answer to this?