These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

NPC Hi Sec Blue Community
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Salvos Rhoska
#141 - 2017-03-07 18:39:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:

in seriousness though, you can gank gankers, quite easily, and could even make a decent profit on it.

so you fit out your own "counter gank" ship, well you can easily fit out a t1 catalyst for about 2-3mil, which will have more than enough dps to pop theirs before concord arrives.


So you are seriously suggesting a 0-2mil profit +time to locate + hauler for whatever might drop, is worth it?

You consider that "decent profit"?

If you're just looking at solo gankers, it wouldn't be worth it.

If instead you look for gank fleets on freighters, then the profit increases. Take this kill for example:

https://zkillboard.com/kill/60545494/

24 attackers total, including 9 bombers that drop 10-15 million each. If you are quick enough, there's up to 130 million in loot. Drop an MTU and salvage the T2 ships for a bit more (no real idea though on how much that would add).


Dude...

130mil for killing 24 ships before they engage their target and become CONCORD splatter.
Or before the rest run off before that.

Or organizing an AG fleet to deal with 24 targets, each AG ship at cost, and there is zero profit in it.

Its irrational to claim AG is profitable, when it is documented, stated and accepted that even suicide gank fleets can only break a profit off far more lucrative single targets (certainly well beyond 130mil).

You can make that 130mil CONCORD splatter profit just by looting the resultant ganker wrecks with a rookie ship.
You dont need a fleet for that, nor any of the other complications/costs.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#142 - 2017-03-07 18:40:28 UTC
Amojin wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
It's ok, it was pretty obvious. I'm in favour of the limited engagement timer.


I'm sure you are. Because it's meaningless. You will continue to carry on doing what you do with disposable alts. The limited engagement timer is completely in your favor, so of course you're in favor of it.

When you have a throw away toon, everything is in your favor. The experience of linear time lends itself to a logical progression of action, leading to consequences. However, when you can create throwaway people, you can completely divorce yourself, your main, in this case, from any consequences, while experiencing the benefits of all the risky and evil actions the alts take.

You know there is no reason to throw away characters that have good sec status right?

If you have evidence that characters with low sec status are being recycled, have you reported it? It's a bannable action and not something gankers do.
Amojin
Doomheim
#143 - 2017-03-07 18:42:06 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:

You know there is no reason to throw away characters that have good sec status right?

If you have evidence that characters with low sec status are being recycled, have you reported it? It's a bannable action and not something gankers do.


'Throwaway' as in they mean nothing, not that you are actually recycling them. Of course you're not going to toss them when they have a good status, still. Do you really think these semantic arguments fool anyone with half a brain in their skulls?
Bjorn Tyrson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#144 - 2017-03-07 18:43:01 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:

in seriousness though, you can gank gankers, quite easily, and could even make a decent profit on it.

so you fit out your own "counter gank" ship, well you can easily fit out a t1 catalyst for about 2-3mil, which will have more than enough dps to pop theirs before concord arrives.


So you are seriously suggesting a 0-2mil profit +time to locate + hauler for whatever might drop, is worth it?

You consider that "decent profit"?

If you're just looking at solo gankers, it wouldn't be worth it.

If instead you look for gank fleets on freighters, then the profit increases. Take this kill for example:

https://zkillboard.com/kill/60545494/

24 attackers total, including 9 bombers that drop 10-15 million each. If you are quick enough, there's up to 130 million in loot. Drop an MTU and salvage the T2 ships for a bit more (no real idea though on how much that would add).

You won't get all of the loot, as the gankers will also be recovering it, but hanging around busy systems could turn a good amount of ISK if you are careful not to be ganked also.


not to mention that gankers are not exactly hard to locate, they tend to congregate in only a handful of systems, which is why avoiding them is so damn easy.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#145 - 2017-03-07 18:43:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:

in seriousness though, you can gank gankers, quite easily, and could even make a decent profit on it.

so you fit out your own "counter gank" ship, well you can easily fit out a t1 catalyst for about 2-3mil, which will have more than enough dps to pop theirs before concord arrives.


So you are seriously suggesting a 0-2mil profit +time to locate + hauler for whatever might drop, is worth it?

You consider that "decent profit"?

If you're just looking at solo gankers, it wouldn't be worth it.

If instead you look for gank fleets on freighters, then the profit increases. Take this kill for example:

https://zkillboard.com/kill/60545494/

24 attackers total, including 9 bombers that drop 10-15 million each. If you are quick enough, there's up to 130 million in loot. Drop an MTU and salvage the T2 ships for a bit more (no real idea though on how much that would add).


Dude...

130mil for killing 24 ships before they engage their target and become CONCORD splatter.
Or before the rest run off before that.

Or organizing an AG fleet to deal with 24 targets, each AG ship at cost, and there is zero profit in it.

Its irrational to claim AG is profitable, when it is documented, stated and accepted that even suicide gank fleets can only break a profit off far more lucrative single targets (certainly well beyond 130mil).

Ma'am...

You dont have to kill any of them. CONCORD is going to do that anyway.

It isn't hard to understand....****, maybe it is.

Whoring on CONCORD kills just allows access to bounty payments. It wasn't what I was referring to.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#146 - 2017-03-07 18:50:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Amojin wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:

You know there is no reason to throw away characters that have good sec status right?

If you have evidence that characters with low sec status are being recycled, have you reported it? It's a bannable action and not something gankers do.


'Throwaway' as in they mean nothing, not that you are actually recycling them. Of course you're not going to toss them when they have a good status, still. Do you really think these semantic arguments fool anyone with half a brain in their skulls?

If they aren't throwing them away, then they aren't throwaway alts.

I know you haven't been here long, but throwaway alt is a term used here most commonly to imply alt recycling/abandoning to avoid the affects of low sec status and it's a bannable offence.

It's not semantics, simply understanding the term in its usual meaning here, but I'll admit, I may not have half a brain.
Salvos Rhoska
#147 - 2017-03-07 18:50:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:

in seriousness though, you can gank gankers, quite easily, and could even make a decent profit on it.

so you fit out your own "counter gank" ship, well you can easily fit out a t1 catalyst for about 2-3mil, which will have more than enough dps to pop theirs before concord arrives.


So you are seriously suggesting a 0-2mil profit +time to locate + hauler for whatever might drop, is worth it?

You consider that "decent profit"?

If you're just looking at solo gankers, it wouldn't be worth it.

If instead you look for gank fleets on freighters, then the profit increases. Take this kill for example:

https://zkillboard.com/kill/60545494/

24 attackers total, including 9 bombers that drop 10-15 million each. If you are quick enough, there's up to 130 million in loot. Drop an MTU and salvage the T2 ships for a bit more (no real idea though on how much that would add).


Dude...

130mil for killing 24 ships before they engage their target and become CONCORD splatter.
Or before the rest run off before that.

Or organizing an AG fleet to deal with 24 targets, each AG ship at cost, and there is zero profit in it.

Its irrational to claim AG is profitable, when it is documented, stated and accepted that even suicide gank fleets can only break a profit off far more lucrative single targets (certainly well beyond 130mil).

Ma'am...

You dont have to kill any of them. CONCORD is going to do that anyway.

It isn't hard to understand....****, maybe it is.

Whoring on CONCORD kills just allows access to bounty payments. It wasn't what I was referring to.


Hence, AG is systemically rendered pointless and profitless.

I can instead loot the 130mil off the wrecks after concord splatters the gank, in a rookie ship.

All goddam 24 of them. Yeehaa!

Anyone claiming AG has profit, is flat out wrong.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Amojin
Doomheim
#148 - 2017-03-07 18:54:45 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:

If they aren't throwing them away, then they aren't throwaway alts.

I know you haven't been here long, but throwaway alt is a term used here most commonly to imply alt recycling/abandoning to avoid the affects of low sec status and it's a bankable offence.

It's not semantics, simply understanding the term in its usual meaning here, but I'll admit, I may not have half a brain.


Yes, it's bankable, alright, but we'll call that a Freudian slip, and assume you meant bannable, which I'm sure you did. Now, how many players would have to keep track of 25,000 goons, and report the single instances where they disappeared? CCP has no reason to police this - you're paying them real money.

And with corporate gankers having 12k-25k 'corps,' the odds? Well, let's just say they're in your favor, right?
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#149 - 2017-03-07 18:54:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Hence, AG is pointless and profitless.

I can instead loot the 130mil off the wrecks after concord splatters the gank, in a rookie ship.

Yes AG is pointless in my view, but my view is no more valid then their's, and I'm certain they see point in what they do, even if I can't. Whether they are profitless, I have no idea.

I doubt you would be able to loot it all in a rookie ship and gain much profit at all. The cargo isn't large enough.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#150 - 2017-03-07 19:03:18 UTC
Amojin wrote:

Yes, it's bankable, alright, but we'll call that a Freudian slip

You can call it a Freudian slip. I just call it autocorrect on my phone. Either or, who cares.

As to the rest....We see all the time here people making claims they don't actually know are true. They think it, therefore it must be so, even if it isn't. If you have evidence of alts being thrown away, report it. If not, expect to be asked about it here, because it's just another baseless claim that you can't support with any evidence.
Salvos Rhoska
#151 - 2017-03-07 19:06:55 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:

Yes AG is pointless in my view, but my view is no more valid then their's, and I'm certain they see point in what they do, even if I can't.

I doubt you would be able to loot it all in a rookie ship and gain much profit at all. The cargo isn't large enough.


Yet you and other idiots tried to argue their was substantial profit in it.

You yourself advocated there was a pittance of 130mil in somehow nailing down and destroying a full-fit 24 man gank fleet.
Many of which attacking might incur CONCORD.

Yet you completely omitted the practical costs and impracticality of such an effort.

I am extremely disappointed in you. You claim to only hold to the truth, but this **** you posted is anything but.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Amojin
Doomheim
#152 - 2017-03-07 19:08:34 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Amojin wrote:

Yes, it's bankable, alright, but we'll call that a Freudian slip

You can call it a Freudian slip. I just call it autocorrect on my phone. Either or, who cares.

As to the rest....We see all the time here people making claims they don't actually know are true. They think it, therefore it must be so, even if it isn't. If you have evidence of alts being thrown away, report it. If not, expect to be asked about it here, because it's just another baseless claim that you can't support with any evidence.


Well, here's some not so baseless claims. You gankers use alts to profit your mains. You are completely divorced from the consequences of your actions due to this mechanic. You even brag about it. Like I said, code (the algorithm, not the corp) is a completely neutral, artificial construct. It treats everyone fairly. If your main profited from your main's actions, I'd shut right the hell up.

But, the fact, by all of your own admission, is that this is not the case. You're damned lucky that your game of choice is run by a for-profit gaming company, because I would ban you immediately and send off mails to all the other mu* wizards, too. You would have been perma-banned from everywhere we could reach.

You should really, really, love ccp. Tell them thank you, and mean it.
Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#153 - 2017-03-07 19:09:01 UTC
Amojin wrote:
Keno Skir wrote:
Amojin wrote:
I'm sure a lot of you know this, but a lot of good, decent, honorable things, started as a revolution. Countries have been formed from them, one in 1776, for example.


Way to pick one of the least good, decent or honorable patches of mud on the planet as your example. Perhaps Nazi Germany will be your second piece of evidence to back up the good in revolution?

;)



Well, no. I don't think I want to touch that. Hitler was actually not German, but Austrian, and there's just a whole lot of the economic situation and why Germany was desperate, at the time... No, that's not a revolution, but a coup, and Israel is actually our ally.

The smart thing to do would be to ignore that tack for an argument?


It was most definitely a revolution. Read some books by Martin Broszat or Ian Kershaw to educate yourself.

What has Hitler being Austrian to do with the historical fact of "Nazi Germany"?
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#154 - 2017-03-07 19:10:30 UTC
Amojin wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:

If they aren't throwing them away, then they aren't throwaway alts.

I know you haven't been here long, but throwaway alt is a term used here most commonly to imply alt recycling/abandoning to avoid the affects of low sec status and it's a bankable offence.

It's not semantics, simply understanding the term in its usual meaning here, but I'll admit, I may not have half a brain.


Yes, it's bankable, alright, but we'll call that a Freudian slip, and assume you meant bannable, which I'm sure you did. Now, how many players would have to keep track of 25,000 goons, and report the single instances where they disappeared? CCP has no reason to police this - you're paying them real money.

And with corporate gankers having 12k-25k 'corps,' the odds? Well, let's just say they're in your favor, right?

I understand your concerns. I can not speak for all the other gankers out there, but in CODE. we are actually proud of our -10 sec status. This toon is as valuable as my "main" is. My "main" is actually scouting and looting and is therefore suspect almost all the time.

Evil RatKid
Amojin
Doomheim
#155 - 2017-03-07 19:10:51 UTC
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
It was most definitely a revolution. Read some books by Martin Broszat or Ian Kershaw to educate yourself.

What has Hitler being Austrian to do with the historical fact of "Nazi Germany"?


It's just going to be deleted, even if I tell you. What's the point?
Salvos Rhoska
#156 - 2017-03-07 19:13:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
What has Hitler being Austrian to do with the historical fact of "Nazi Germany"?


A great deal.

But it is not relevant to this thread.

Return to topic, please, at least as relevant to EVE.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#157 - 2017-03-07 19:15:06 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You yourself advocated there was a pittance of 130mil in somehow nailing down and destroying a full-fit 24 man gank fleet.

No I didn't.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Many of which attacking might incur CONCORD.

I specifically mentioned setting safety to green/yellow. You can't be Concordekkened at all if you use the safety correctly.

However, this is heading down one of your stupid rabbit holes where you ignore what is actually written, just to push some alternative point you think is somehow impressive. As usual, it's boring and adds no value, so knock yourself out with whatever joy it brings you. I have no interest in it.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#158 - 2017-03-07 19:18:29 UTC
Amojin wrote:
...You gankers use alts to profit your mains. You are completely divorced from the consequences of your actions due to this mechanic. You even brag about it. Like I said, code (the algorithm, not the corp) is a completely neutral, artificial construct. It treats everyone fairly. If your main profited from your main's actions, I'd shut right the hell up.

But, the fact, by all of your own admission, is that this is not the case. You're damned lucky that your game of choice is run by a for-profit gaming company, because I would ban you immediately...

Ive never ganked a single ship in this game.

So ban me for what?
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#159 - 2017-03-07 19:18:59 UTC
Amojin wrote:
But, the fact, by all of your own admission, is that this is not the case. You're damned lucky that your game of choice is run by a for-profit gaming company, because I would ban you immediately and send off mails to all the other mu* wizards, too. You would have been perma-banned from everywhere we could reach.

Do yourself a favour and accept EVE for what it is. This game always had multiboxing and always will have. If you think that makes the game bad for you, feel free to play something else, there are a ton of other games out there which do not allow such a thing.

What you do now is so typical anti-ganking. You create yourself some artificial moral high horse from where you can moan about how the game is unfair and favours the other players in some kind, instead of embarrassing EVE for what it is and actually have fun while playing it.

The AG channel is already full of those people, Dravclad is their prototype, we don't need any more.

Evil RatKid
Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#160 - 2017-03-07 19:19:14 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Aaron wrote:
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
This is gonna be good. I thoroughly enjoyed the topics here on your Blue Null sec attempt. I put a fiver on Dracvlad screwing you over within 5 pages from now.


Drac won't be part of this.


Only in as much as Herzog and I suggested that you actually do it rather than talk about it, but this is completely your baby, I am back in sov 0.0 and loving it, I do however wish you luck in your endeavours.


Nicolai Serkanner, why, I spent a very good first period of my Eve game time with Aaron and I had a great time, and while we may have developed differences I still like and respect him, we had some stonking fights and a lot of fun in Hub Zero, and I have very fond memories of that period.


So in a nut shell, good luck Aaron.


Page 5 ... I called it!!!

Now let the screwing over start. We all know the Drav can not not "help" you Aaron.