These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Heated Conflict Brewing In The Uedama System!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kess Aihaken
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#61 - 2016-12-20 18:07:16 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Kess Aihaken wrote:
To further disrupt CODE's ability to make monetary gains, run decoy freighters. Run them the same way you would one full to the bulkheads.

Watch CODE gank only to be thwarted by nothing to be gained.


You mean watch them cargo scan the decoys just like they cargo scan every empty freighter that comes along, 3-5 jumps out of the ambush system?

They're not idiots, you know. Freighters get scanned undocking from Jita. They get scanned by spotters along the route. They get scanned yet again by the bumpers. None of this triggers a CONCORD response, either directly or via actionable flagging.

Just a quick edit to add: you know who those spotters often are? They're the DSTs with passive targeters fitted who cruise along innocently, going the same way as the freighter, until it's time to scoop the loot.



That's why I said decentralize as well. They can't be everywhere.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#62 - 2016-12-20 18:40:59 UTC
How decentralized do you want to get? There's already five significant trade hubs: Jita, Amarr, Dodixie, Hek, Rens. Thera, too. That doesn't count the nullsec hubs, of course.

The more decentralized you get, the more the economy bogs down. And CODE doesn't have to be everywhere at once, even in your model. They just have to make sure you don't know where they are until they hit. They spend a few days hitting this hub. They spend a few days hitting that one. They're not the only group of gankers, just the one people seem to love to complain about the most. And remember, the more you decentralize, the more area you have to protect, while they can continue to concentrate their forces on each strike.
Jade Blackwind
#63 - 2016-12-20 20:04:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Blackwind
Arrendis wrote:
How decentralized do you want to get? There's already five significant trade hubs: Jita, Amarr, Dodixie, Hek, Rens. Thera, too. That doesn't count the nullsec hubs, of course.

The more decentralized you get, the more the economy bogs down. And CODE doesn't have to be everywhere at once, even in your model. They just have to make sure you don't know where they are until they hit. They spend a few days hitting this hub. They spend a few days hitting that one. They're not the only group of gankers, just the one people seem to love to complain about the most. And remember, the more you decentralize, the more area you have to protect, while they can continue to concentrate their forces on each strike.


TBH, Rens is dying. When I last saw the place, it had 150 people, Jita 2000. S--t just doesn't sell. The trend is opposite, everything slowly shrinks to Jita where the market is.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#64 - 2016-12-20 20:12:25 UTC
Jade Blackwind wrote:
TBH, Rens is dying. When I last saw the place, it had 150 people, Jita 2000. S--t just doesn't sell. The trend is opposite, everything slowly shrinks to Jita where the market is.


Rens has always been the smallest. Jita is the largest, Amarr a quarter the size of Jita, Dodixie a quarter the size of Amarr, and so on.
Kess Aihaken
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#65 - 2016-12-20 20:33:34 UTC
Actually I was thinking more like 15 or 20 trade hubs. At least. And yes, I know the economy would get bogged down. As I said, everyone would suffer. And it still wouldn't stop them.

But let's be serious, it's that or make it impossible to bring active weapons into high sec. Frankly I don't care which, but if people are actually serious about making it hard for them, that's what it's going to take.
Persephone Alleile
Tartarus Covert Operations
#66 - 2016-12-20 20:41:27 UTC
Kess Aihaken wrote:
Actually I was thinking more like 15 or 20 trade hubs. At least. And yes, I know the economy would get bogged down. As I said, everyone would suffer. And it still wouldn't stop them.

But let's be serious, it's that or make it impossible to bring active weapons into high sec. Frankly I don't care which, but if people are actually serious about making it hard for them, that's what it's going to take.


DED can't stop baseliner pirates from operating in high security space, how would they manage to enforce a weapons ban on capsuleers? Better yet, if they ban weapons in high security space, who will they pay to shoot said pirates?
Arrendis
TK Corp
#67 - 2016-12-20 20:43:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Arrendis
Kess Aihaken wrote:
Actually I was thinking more like 15 or 20 trade hubs. At least. And yes, I know the economy would get bogged down. As I said, everyone would suffer. And it still wouldn't stop them.

But let's be serious, it's that or make it impossible to bring active weapons into high sec. Frankly I don't care which, but if people are actually serious about making it hard for them, that's what it's going to take.


Exactly right. Which is what the 'go blow them up' crowd don't want to hear.
Kess Aihaken
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#68 - 2016-12-20 20:47:33 UTC
Then they're not interested in solving the problem, only whining about it.

I suppose the other option would be to have CONCORD seize CODE's assets and actually run them into the ground.
Arnulf Ogunkoya
Clan Ogunkoya
Electus Matari
#69 - 2016-12-21 20:18:31 UTC
Well. There is another reason for shooting at gankers & the like that is unrelated to actually stopping them.

High-sec based groups that include combat pilots have to find things for them to do in order to keep them engaged. This is one. Though I doubt any group worth anything would do it to the exclusion of all else.

Regards, Arnulf Ogunkoya.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#70 - 2016-12-21 21:06:07 UTC
Sure, and as combat readiness exercises, it makes a reasonable amount of sense. But as some kind of 'challenge that would put [a strategist's] mind to the test'? It makes no sense at all.

Unless we decide to believe Mr. Binchiette's assertion that he is, in fact, not giving accurate information about his motivations. But then, if we assume he's lying, he could be lying about lying.
Alessienne Ellecon
Doomheim
#71 - 2016-12-24 14:29:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Alessienne Ellecon
I admire the Hisec Militia and their willingness and dogged determination to fight the good fight against the New Order.

BUT

I agree with some of the other posters in this thread: many anti-gankers are trying to hurt their enemies in the wrong manner. That's why the Solitude Rangers have found a way to hit CODE and their affiliates where it hurts most. Studies of New Order propaganda, ship fittings, tactics, kill data and even conversations with NOH agents themselves have yielded information on key factors that can be exploited:

Hisec gank fits - particularly the fast destroyer fits such as Catalysts and Thrashers - are fit for maximum damage factor and little else besides. A skilfully tanked freighter, hauler or mining ship can withstand a barrage of fire long enough to be saved by DED intervention, or even break free of tackling and evacuate to the nearest station or citadel.

Only certain hulls known for their unfavourable module slot ratios, such as Retrievers and Covetors, are targeted. Module configurations that compensate for these slot ratios would greatly decrease the incentive to attack these ships. Orcas should be fitted for the highest possible armour rating.

Freighters should fit only bulkheads and nothing else, and should be escorted by combat pilots.

A lot of hisec ganking that occurs would be avoided entirely if miners and haulers made themselves harder targets. That's why my corp has been reaching out to gank victims, offering them advice on fitting, hauling and mining. One NPC corp member tried a Ranger-fit Procurer; a few days later he jubilantly informed me that he had evaded a dozen attacks, even causing one attacker to rage quit.

Remember: each cubic metre of ore mined without a permit, every 10 million ISK not spent buying a permit, every carebear mining happily in highsec is a slap in the face to CODE and the New Order of Highsec.

Let’s tan their hides!

"CONCORD are the space cops. If you attack someone in a high-security solar system, CONCORD will commit police brutality." - Encyclopedia Dramatica

If EVE is a PvP game, then Anti-Ganking is emergent gameplay.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#72 - 2016-12-24 16:02:57 UTC
Alessienne Ellecon wrote:
Hisec gank fits - particularly the fast destroyer fits such as Catalysts and Thrashers - are fit for maximum damage factor and little else besides. A skilfully tanked freighter, hauler or mining ship can withstand a barrage of fire long enough to be saved by DED intervention, or even break free of tackling and evacuate to the nearest station or citadel.

Only certain hulls known for their unfavourable module slot ratios, such as Retrievers and Covetors, are targeted. Module configurations that compensate for these slot ratios would greatly decrease the incentive to attack these ships. Orcas should be fitted for the highest possible armour rating.

Freighters should fit only bulkheads and nothing else, and should be escorted by combat pilots.


More effective than shooting them, yes. They use ship scanners to determine how many catalysts they need, though. Don't think 'if I just fit more tank, they can't kill me'.
Alessienne Ellecon
Doomheim
#73 - 2016-12-25 02:16:12 UTC
Arrendis wrote:

More effective than shooting them, yes. They use ship scanners to determine how many catalysts they need, though. Don't think 'if I just fit more tank, they can't kill me'.


Don't misunderstand, there's more to it than just MOAR TANK. Ranger barge fits employ highly specific configurations designed solely to frustrate attackers, or at least force them to expend a disproportionate amount of time and effort on a single ship.

"CONCORD are the space cops. If you attack someone in a high-security solar system, CONCORD will commit police brutality." - Encyclopedia Dramatica

If EVE is a PvP game, then Anti-Ganking is emergent gameplay.