These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Two serious questions for the "Highsec Carebear"
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Masik Dreamweaver
Little Peoples Revolution
#521 - 2012-07-03 01:20:59 UTC
Thor Kerrigan wrote:

I think 100% safety in highsec is not fair while you can still keep supplying isk and items into the economy. It would make highsec income grossly overpowered in regards to other sec regions.


this topic came up in ts other day with rdn.. there are 2 main problems

1. high sec should mean 100% safe with sec status 1 and declining thereafter. 100% safe should include a system that helps newb players with maybe repping and maybe super dmging ships responding with in a couple secs instead of 10. these benefits should be less and response time more as sec status lowers.

2. this goes with number 1, risk vs reward is not in play in high sec. with these included security features reward should be lowered. lower level agents available and small roids and roids available based on sec status. a trade hub should by all means have the purest of protection while your outlying areas should be less protected
Pipa Porto
#522 - 2012-07-03 01:22:59 UTC
Masik Dreamweaver wrote:
Thor Kerrigan wrote:

I think 100% safety in highsec is not fair while you can still keep supplying isk and items into the economy. It would make highsec income grossly overpowered in regards to other sec regions.


this topic came up in ts other day with rdn.. there are 2 main problems

1. high sec should mean 100% safe with sec status 1 and declining thereafter. 100% safe should include a system that helps newb players with maybe repping and maybe super dmging ships responding with in a couple secs instead of 10. these benefits should be less and response time more as sec status lowers.

2. this goes with number 1, risk vs reward is not in play in high sec. with these included security features reward should be lowered. lower level agents available and small roids and roids available based on sec status. a trade hub should by all means have the purest of protection while your outlying areas should be less protected


Newbie systems already have certain protections.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#523 - 2012-07-03 05:12:30 UTC
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
I would like to ask two questions to anyone who considers him/herself a "highsec carebear".

So my questions are the following:

1. What exactly is a reasonable amount of risk? In other words, at which point would losing your most expensive ship (NPCs or Players, no matter) result in you going "Yep, I truly deserved to lose that ship and I can only blame myself". Showing emotion - sadness or rage - for such a lose is understandable; such is the nature of the game. So please, an honest response.

2. What exactly is a reasonable amount of profit you should be allowed to make? What is the maximum and the minimum isk/hour that should be available when you perform said activities under you ideal risk/reward ratio you thought of when answering question 1.


--- EDIT 1 --- (after 5 pages) (POST #91) ---

So anyways... 5 pages I there is barely anyone who actually responded to the questions. Is it because the real highsec dwellers simply adapted and are playing the game or because they do not exist?



--- EDIT 2 --- (after 24 pages) (POST #480) ---

I believe the hulk vs suicide ganker topic has been hammered out. Let's keep it to the OP topic please. What I am essentially asking highsec dwellers is :

What, in your opinion, is a proper counter to your "safer PVE" if not suicide ganking or wardeccing.

It easy to call something overpowered or not fair, but what is your idea of fair then? There are many activities in EVE and "getting your killmails" is not the only way to counter something.

I think 100% safety in highsec is not fair while you can still keep supplying isk and items into the economy. It would make highsec income grossly overpowered in regards to other sec regions.


So, after 24 pages the OP finally makes the intent of this thread clear.

In answer to your questions :

1 - NOYB
2 - NOYB

Since this is actually just another thread trying to promote or justify Suicide Ganking of Mining Ships in High Security, the only answer befitting this survey is None Of Your Business.

Now if this thread was actually about a real Suicide Gank, like 1/2 dozen Mercs in Battleships who spend weeks to months tracking a target, using Locator Agents and then scanning said target in system to hot drop and assassinate target in high security, then maybe it would be worth an answer.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Pipa Porto
#524 - 2012-07-03 05:24:10 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Now if this thread was actually about a real Suicide Gank, like 1/2 dozen Mercs in Battleships who spend weeks to months tracking a target, using Locator Agents and then scanning said target in system to hot drop and assassinate target in high security, then maybe it would be worth an answer.


You can use the tools available to make it so that someone needs to do exactly that if they want to specifically kill you.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Daniel Blackwell
Doomheim
#525 - 2012-07-03 05:49:06 UTC
I would love to go to low sec but since losing all my ships, I'm trying to recoup my loses in low sec.

Also, no matter how much you want to, you can't just dive into low sec from day one because of the freaking skill system.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#526 - 2012-07-03 06:06:00 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Now if this thread was actually about a real Suicide Gank, like 1/2 dozen Mercs in Battleships who spend weeks to months tracking a target, using Locator Agents and then scanning said target in system to hot drop and assassinate target in high security, then maybe it would be worth an answer.


You can use the tools available to make it so that someone needs to do exactly that if they want to specifically kill you.


Been there, which is why I brought it up. Now that's real Suicide Ganking.

IMO a single Destroyer killing a Hulk mining in high sec is just taking advantage of unbalanced game mechanics.


'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Pipa Porto
#527 - 2012-07-03 06:08:31 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Now if this thread was actually about a real Suicide Gank, like 1/2 dozen Mercs in Battleships who spend weeks to months tracking a target, using Locator Agents and then scanning said target in system to hot drop and assassinate target in high security, then maybe it would be worth an answer.


You can use the tools available to make it so that someone needs to do exactly that if they want to specifically kill you.


Been there, which is why I brought it up. Now that's real Suicide Ganking.

IMO a single Destroyer killing a Hulk mining in high sec is just taking advantage of unbalanced game mechanics.


The only reason that's possible is that the Miner has refused to take advantage of available game mechanics.

The miner makes a choice when he fails to put any tank on his 300m isk investment.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#528 - 2012-07-03 06:39:40 UTC
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
(...)

Is it really "The Rush" being the only factor you don't like the ship-to-ship PVP aspect of the game?


As I think as him, I wil answer too... it's not just "the rush", it's the impossibility to disincentive it within a ruleset aimed at make abuse as easy and amusing as possible for the perpretators and don't give a **** of the victims.


Even gankers have a predator. It can be the market or other gankers. Or the blob. People who perform under the average always resent those who perform better.

The real question is: are the same tools given to everyone? Since the answer is yes, if your choice is sub-optimal you can only blame yourself.


The same tools? HAH! A miner's tool is a tankless ship worth 400 million and which takes several months to fly, whereas a ganker's tool is a ship the noobs get from the tutorials for free and worth 2 million at most.

Of course, the miner can go sub-optimal and tank the Hulk with a hundred million iSK so it makes a bigger killmail once it meets a gang with four additional hooligans. And then they will have a laugh for the miner's pitiful effort to tank the Hulk.

In order to play his game, a miner puts on the table a giant bullseye worth many hours of his life, whereas gankers put nothing worthy on the table. So, "same tools" my ass.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Pipa Porto
#529 - 2012-07-03 06:44:51 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
(...)

Is it really "The Rush" being the only factor you don't like the ship-to-ship PVP aspect of the game?


As I think as him, I wil answer too... it's not just "the rush", it's the impossibility to disincentive it within a ruleset aimed at make abuse as easy and amusing as possible for the perpretators and don't give a **** of the victims.


Even gankers have a predator. It can be the market or other gankers. Or the blob. People who perform under the average always resent those who perform better.

The real question is: are the same tools given to everyone? Since the answer is yes, if your choice is sub-optimal you can only blame yourself.


The same tools? HAH! A miner's tool is a tankless ship worth 400 million and which takes several months to fly, whereas a ganker's tool is a ship the noobs get from the tutorials for free and worth 2 million at most.

Of course, the miner can go sub-optimal and tank the Hulk with a hundred million iSK so it makes a bigger killmail once it meets a gang with four additional hooligans. And then they will have a laugh for the miner's pitiful effort to tank the Hulk.

In order to play his game, a miner puts on the table a giant bullseye worth many hours of his life, whereas gankers put nothing worthy on the table. So, "same tools" my ass.


A Hulk can, with simple T2 Fittings tank itself such that it cannot be profitably ganked. With a little more effort, it cannot be ganked for less than the cost of its hull. We've gone through this many times.

In addition, with a little effort, a Hulk can escape all ganks.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#530 - 2012-07-03 09:23:49 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
IMO a single Destroyer killing a Hulk mining in high sec is just taking advantage of unbalanced game mechanics.
There is nothing unbalanced about a player falling victim to his own decision to make his ship as weak as possible. You might as well call it unbalanced that you can self-destruct your ship — that way no ship at all is required in order to destroy that Hulk.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#531 - 2012-07-03 10:40:05 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
A Hulk can, with simple T2 Fittings tank itself such that it cannot be profitably ganked. With a little more effort, it cannot be ganked for less than the cost of its hull. We've gone through this many times.

In addition, with a little effort, a Hulk can escape all ganks.


As always you forget that most gankers do it for fun. Those who gank for profit are in minority.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#532 - 2012-07-03 10:44:05 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
As always you forget that most gankers do it for fun. Those who gank for profit are in minority.
Prove it.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#533 - 2012-07-03 10:47:42 UTC
Delen Ormand wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:

I completely +1 you. Specially the part about time to replace the loss as a measure of risk. It is far more dangerous to fly a Hulk than to gank it as it costs 20x more time to lose a Hulk than to gank it.

And yet miners are deemed "cowardly" whereas the gankers are deemed "elite"... guess WHO made upthat yardtstick.


Funny part is, it's very often the same people who paint miners as risk-averse carebear cowards who'll be the first to say that everything is PvP in Eve - including mining. Add the risk from gankers, and miners should be worshipped as the true warriors of Eve..


Please tell us about how mining is not PvP.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#534 - 2012-07-03 10:48:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Prove it.


Check GSF killboard.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#535 - 2012-07-03 10:49:04 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Prove it.
Check GSF killboard.
Links?

Also, provide links to all the other ganks to show that the ones presented there represent a majority.

Put another way: no, really — prove it.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#536 - 2012-07-03 10:50:49 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
A Hulk can, with simple T2 Fittings tank itself such that it cannot be profitably ganked. With a little more effort, it cannot be ganked for less than the cost of its hull. We've gone through this many times.

In addition, with a little effort, a Hulk can escape all ganks.


As always you forget that most gankers do it for fun. Those who gank for profit are in minority.


You seem to have it mixed up. People who gank for fun (at a loss) are the minority. People who gank for profit are able to do it on a continual basis because they don't have to grind isk from another source. You could argue that they're also doing it for fun, but I doubt they would continue the activity if it was no longer profitable.

I gank for fun, at a loss, because I have a steady flow of incomming isk from another source.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#537 - 2012-07-03 10:55:19 UTC
Masik Dreamweaver wrote:
1. high sec should mean 100% safe with sec status 1 and declining thereafter. 100% safe should include a system that helps newb players with maybe repping and maybe super dmging ships responding with in a couple secs instead of 10. these benefits should be less and response time more as sec status lowers.


Will never happen. Rookies are already afforded rules that protect them in starting systems plus a couple of the SoE systems. Highsec should never & most likely will never be 100% safe. There are other games to play if you want to be 100% safe.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#538 - 2012-07-03 11:04:07 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
IMO a single Destroyer killing a Hulk mining in high sec is just taking advantage of unbalanced game mechanics.


In other news news, I decided to abseil with out the proper equipment or training & fell out of my harness. I hit the branches of several trees on my way down which undoubtedly saved my life. The ground however, broke my legs, spine & left shoulder & I will be unable to walk for the next several months.

IMO a single patch of ground doing such damage to the human body is just taking advantage of unbalanced life mechanics.

Sounds really stupid doesn't it? That's because life, just like EVE, is not fair.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#539 - 2012-07-03 11:17:29 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
In other news news, I decided to abseil with out the proper equipment or training & fell out of my harness. I hit the branches of several trees on my way down which undoubtedly saved my life. The ground however, broke my legs, spine & left shoulder & I will be unable to walk for the next several months.

IMO a single patch of ground doing such damage to the human body is just taking advantage of unbalanced life mechanics.

Sounds really stupid doesn't it? That's because life, just like EVE, is not fair.


Extreme sports? If yes, you should know about involved risks and you take those risks willingly.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#540 - 2012-07-03 11:34:56 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Tippia wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
IMO a single Destroyer killing a Hulk mining in high sec is just taking advantage of unbalanced game mechanics.
There is nothing unbalanced about a player falling victim to his own decision to make his ship as weak as possible. You might as well call it unbalanced that you can self-destruct your ship — that way no ship at all is required in order to destroy that Hulk.

That's your opinion.

Even with a full defensive fit up, the Hulk is still a wet bag that can be easily ripped apart just by sneezing on it.

Mallak Azaria wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
IMO a single Destroyer killing a Hulk mining in high sec is just taking advantage of unbalanced game mechanics.


In other news news, I decided to abseil with out the proper equipment or training & fell out of my harness. I hit the branches of several trees on my way down which undoubtedly saved my life. The ground however, broke my legs, spine & left shoulder & I will be unable to walk for the next several months.

IMO a single patch of ground doing such damage to the human body is just taking advantage of unbalanced life mechanics.

Sounds really stupid doesn't it? That's because life, just like EVE, is not fair.

In other news, your attempt at sarcasm as well as your analogy failed.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle