These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High sec cargo gank... Whats the hate? Solutions?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#21 - 2012-11-03 21:30:39 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.


to yes, the would rather you jet your cargo for them. however they're more than happy to blow you up if you're stupid enough to stick 20bn isk in a charon and auto pilot to the arse end of nowhere.
Jaison Savrin
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#22 - 2012-11-03 21:30:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaison Savrin
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.

Risk free isk?


By risk free isk you mean being forced to willingly have a ship blown up?

You and I must have entirely different ideas of "risk free". To me risk free isk is being able to fly around high sec knowing that you can make yourelf ungankable or just knowing that gankingis such a pain in the ass that your pretty much guaranteed to not be ganked.


Not to meniton knowing that when I don't stuff my hold with billions of ISK in valuable that I can fly around high sec with no worry of being targetted by another player. That sounds a lot more risk free to me than commiting suidice.




Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk. It is an operating cost. The mechanics allow the gankers to mitigate the risk almost entirely. The gankers know how much they are going to spend before the freighter pilot even knows they are a target. The only "risk" is things not dropping which puts it on the same plane as PvE and hoping for officer drops.


For freighter pilots the only way to mitigate the chance of being ganked is to be less efficient. Basically a ganker is asking for a person to give up their time or risk having their day ruined by someone who thinks leet PvP is bumping a ship until his friends in their pre purchased ships can show up and blow them up.
Dar Manic
Dirt Road Services
#23 - 2012-11-03 21:32:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Dar Manic
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

The frieghter by it's very nature will be profitable to gank when enough crap is stuffed in it. Reducing the cargo hold and increasing it's tank to make it worthless to gank is not the solution and just amounts to attempting to eliminate yet more pvp from high sec.


This.

Fit a tank, take more w/smaller load values, etc. Ganking in hi-sec sucks but it is just part of the game.

Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.


Not risk free though. Your suggestion is correct though. Adapt or die (wo0tage, I got to use that phrase for once!!)

I just don't understand null sec players.

**Please note: **Anytime I use the phrase PvP in a post, I'm talking about shooting/combat/killing things/blowing things up. Thank you.
Jaison Savrin
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#24 - 2012-11-03 21:33:02 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.


to yes, the would rather you jet your cargo for them. however they're more than happy to blow you up if you're stupid enough to stick 20bn isk in a charon and auto pilot to the arse end of nowhere.




See "Waste your time or be killed. Either way gankers ruin your day."


I run 3 freighters in High Sec and a Jump Freighter when I need it. I have never been ganked. It doesn't mean making 3 trips instead of 1 isn't really freaking annoying.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-11-03 21:38:07 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.

Risk free isk?


By risk free isk you mean being forced to willingly have a ship blown up?

You and I must have entirely different ideas of "risk free". To me risk free isk is being able to fly around high sec knowing that you can make yourelf ungankable or just knowing that gankingis such a pain in the ass that your pretty much guaranteed to not be ganked.


Not to meniton knowing that when I don't stuff my hold with billions of ISK in valuable that I can fly around high sec with no worry of being targetted by another player. That sounds a lot more risk free to me than commiting suidice.




Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk. It is an operating cost. The mechanics allow the gankers to mitigate the risk almost entirely. The gankers know how much they are going to spend before the freighter pilot even knows they are a target. The only "risk" is things not dropping which puts it on the same plane as PvE and hoping for officer drops.


For freighter pilots the only way to mitigate the chance of being ganked is to be less efficient. Basically a ganker is asking for a person to give up their time or risk having their day ruined by someone who thinks leet PvP is bumping a ship until his friends in their pre purchased ships can show up and blow them up.


I'm sorry. That sucks. You have to be "less efficient" or more gankable.

Geez, how dare you have to decide between hauling more and getting ganked and hauling less and not getting ganked. To heck with CCP for doing that to you, the horror of it.

I mean the least they could do is make other ships have to be "less efficient" or more gankable. Why don't miners have to do this, why don't PvE'ers have to do this. I mean it seems so unfair that you would have to actively decide between being more efficient at the cost of increased risk or less efficient and knowing that no one is going to blow you up.


Gosh dang it CCP, stop making people have to "make decisions" and just let them do it all.






Seriously, that's frigging pathetic. Cry more man.
Jaison Savrin
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#26 - 2012-11-03 21:38:51 UTC
Dar Manic wrote:
Not risk free though. Your suggestion is correct though. Adapt or die (wo0tage, I got to use that phrase for once!!)



What is the risk though? Ganks have two outcomes. Target dies or target lives. If the target lives it is because the gankers failed in the planning phase. That isn't a risk; it is a mistake. There is nothing a target can do other than make themselves a less appetizing target. I already do this. It doesn't make ganking a risky occupation though.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-11-03 21:39:31 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.


to yes, the would rather you jet your cargo for them. however they're more than happy to blow you up if you're stupid enough to stick 20bn isk in a charon and auto pilot to the arse end of nowhere.




See "Waste your time or be killed. Either way gankers ruin your day."


I run 3 freighters in High Sec and a Jump Freighter when I need it. I have never been ganked. It doesn't mean making 3 trips instead of 1 isn't really freaking annoying.

GTFO?

Never ganked?

Say it aint so.



Yeah, only thing that pops into my head is STFU.
Den Arius
Monte Inc
#28 - 2012-11-03 21:39:37 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Dar Manic wrote:
Not risk free though. Your suggestion is correct though. Adapt or die (wo0tage, I got to use that phrase for once!!)



What is the risk though? Ganks have two outcomes. Target dies or target lives. If the target lives it is because the gankers failed in the planning phase. That isn't a risk; it is a mistake. There is nothing a target can do other than make themselves a less appetizing target. I already do this. It doesn't make ganking a risky occupation though.


The chance of you making a mistake could be including in the "risk" arguement..

Bobb
Jaison Savrin
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#29 - 2012-11-03 21:40:15 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.

Risk free isk?


By risk free isk you mean being forced to willingly have a ship blown up?

You and I must have entirely different ideas of "risk free". To me risk free isk is being able to fly around high sec knowing that you can make yourelf ungankable or just knowing that gankingis such a pain in the ass that your pretty much guaranteed to not be ganked.


Not to meniton knowing that when I don't stuff my hold with billions of ISK in valuable that I can fly around high sec with no worry of being targetted by another player. That sounds a lot more risk free to me than commiting suidice.




Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk. It is an operating cost. The mechanics allow the gankers to mitigate the risk almost entirely. The gankers know how much they are going to spend before the freighter pilot even knows they are a target. The only "risk" is things not dropping which puts it on the same plane as PvE and hoping for officer drops.


For freighter pilots the only way to mitigate the chance of being ganked is to be less efficient. Basically a ganker is asking for a person to give up their time or risk having their day ruined by someone who thinks leet PvP is bumping a ship until his friends in their pre purchased ships can show up and blow them up.


I'm sorry. That sucks. You have to be "less efficient" or more gankable.

Geez, how dare you have to decide between hauling more and getting ganked and hauling less and not getting ganked. To heck with CCP for doing that to you, the horror of it.

I mean the least they could do is make other ships have to be "less efficient" or more gankable. Why don't miners have to do this, why don't PvE'ers have to do this. I mean it seems so unfair that you would have to actively decide between being more efficient at the cost of increased risk or less efficient and knowing that no one is going to blow you up.


Gosh dang it CCP, stop making people have to "make decisions" and just let them do it all.






Seriously, that's frigging pathetic. Cry more man.



My biggest complaint isn't that ganking happens. It is people who claim it is a risky thing to do. It isn't. I have already invested in what I need to do to mitigate my risk. All I am saying is ganking is a win/win and not risky. Gankers have no right to complain.
Dave Stark
#30 - 2012-11-03 21:40:22 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.


to yes, the would rather you jet your cargo for them. however they're more than happy to blow you up if you're stupid enough to stick 20bn isk in a charon and auto pilot to the arse end of nowhere.




See "Waste your time or be killed. Either way gankers ruin your day."


I run 3 freighters in High Sec and a Jump Freighter when I need it. I have never been ganked. It doesn't mean making 3 trips instead of 1 isn't really freaking annoying.


no, your own stupidity and impatience ruin your day. gankers are just there to take advantage of your stupidity or impatience.
Jaison Savrin
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#31 - 2012-11-03 21:42:16 UTC
Den Arius wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Dar Manic wrote:
Not risk free though. Your suggestion is correct though. Adapt or die (wo0tage, I got to use that phrase for once!!)



What is the risk though? Ganks have two outcomes. Target dies or target lives. If the target lives it is because the gankers failed in the planning phase. That isn't a risk; it is a mistake. There is nothing a target can do other than make themselves a less appetizing target. I already do this. It doesn't make ganking a risky occupation though.


The chance of you making a mistake could be including in the "risk" arguement..



I personally define risk as an outside factor that can prevent success or raise cost. A mistake being made in the planning phase isn't something that can't be prevented. It can raise the operation cost but it isn't something someone else did. So I don't see it as a risk. It is an error of judgement.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#32 - 2012-11-03 21:42:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk.
Risk = cost × probability. For p=1, risk = cost.

It's still a risk in and of itself, and then you combine it with the risks in the pay-out, and with the simple logic that, if you want to claim that it's no risk just because you have a 100% probability, you should campaign for CONCORD only having a 50% response rate so the gankers' risk increases…

Oh, and your every-day operating costs are risks too — just ones that you can predict with a high degree of certainty (surprise, surprise).
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#33 - 2012-11-03 21:43:58 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Gankers just want their risk free money. Just be less efficient/use more freighters until they get bored.

Risk free isk?

By risk free isk you mean being forced to willingly have a ship blown up?

You and I must have entirely different ideas of "risk free". To me risk free isk is being able to fly around high sec knowing that you can make yourelf ungankable or just knowing that gankingis such a pain in the ass that your pretty much guaranteed to not be ganked.

Not to meniton knowing that when I don't stuff my hold with billions of ISK in valuable that I can fly around high sec with no worry of being targetted by another player. That sounds a lot more risk free to me than commiting suidice.

But .. but I thought ganking wasn't supposed to part of the EVE Online "Highsec Experience (tm)"

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#34 - 2012-11-03 21:44:49 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk.
Risk = cost × probability. For p=1, risk = cost.

It's still a risk in and of itself, and then you combine it with the risks in the pay-out, and with the simple logic that, if you want to claim that it's no risk just because you have a 100% probability, you should campaign for CONCORD only having a 50% response rate so the gankers' risk increases…

Oh, and your every-day operating costs are risks too — just ones that you can predict with a high degree of certainty (surprise, surprise).

I like this idea. Much like the beloved ECM mechanic, sometimes CONCORD just doesn't bother to help.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#35 - 2012-11-03 21:49:18 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:

But .. but I thought ganking wasn't supposed to part of the EVE Online "Highsec Experience (tm)"

Give it time, it'll get there.


And remember,
Because the hulk wasn't intedned to be a guaranteed profit to gank, no ship in high sec is supposed to be profitable to ever gank.

We will never achieve hello kitty online if we do not twitst and turn every little thing to our advantage when we convince CCP that that's what everyone wants.
Dave Stark
#36 - 2012-11-03 21:51:49 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

And remember,
Because the hulk wasn't intedned to be a guaranteed profit to gank, no ship in high sec is supposed to be profitable to ever gank.


such a shame a lot of people don't understand that the statement wasn't about ships carrying any kind of cargo and therefore they think it's fine to run around with billions stuffed in their cargo hold and not expect some one to shoot them.
Jaison Savrin
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#37 - 2012-11-03 21:52:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk.
Risk = cost × probability. For p=1, risk = cost.

It's still a risk in and of itself, and then you combine it with the risks in the pay-out, and with the simple logic that, if you want to claim that it's no risk just because you have a 100% probability, you should campaign for CONCORD only having a 50% response rate so the gankers' risk increases…

Oh, and your every-day operating costs are risks too — just ones that you can predict with a high degree of certainty (surprise, surprise).



If I run a company and I know that every single time I turn on a machine it will cost me $300 an hour to run it and I also know I need to run it for 5 hours a day to create a product then I know the cost will be 300*5 per day. It is not a "risk" that I will be charged $1,500 a day. It is an operating cost of running my business.

If I know it takes 10 Tornadoes of a specific fit to kill a max skill freighter and I know that each Tornado costs me 75 mil to buy and fit. I know that a max skill freighter will cost me 75*10 million. With the cargo scanners it is extremely simple to approximate the amount of cargo and the value in a freighter. From there it is a simple bit of math to figure out the probable profit. The only risk is the loot fairy being evil. It puts the risk of gankinig on the same plane as PvEing for rare drops.


The numbers in the second paragraph are probably woefully wrong but my point stands.


Operating costs only become risks in an extremely unstable market. Even then risks in ganking are extremely easy to mitigate and most of them are occurring before the freighter even knows they are being targeted.

Ganking is relatively risk free. I never said "too" risk free. I don't mind ganking. I just think it is really dumb for people to claim it is a risky occupation. Admit y'all, you're just playing around shooting fish in a barrel.
Dar Manic
Dirt Road Services
#38 - 2012-11-03 21:54:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Dar Manic
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:

But .. but I thought ganking wasn't supposed to part of the EVE Online "Highsec Experience (tm)"

Give it time, it'll get there.


And remember,
Because the hulk wasn't intedned to be a guaranteed profit to gank, no ship in high sec is supposed to be profitable to ever gank.

We will never achieve hello kitty online if we do not twitst and turn every little thing to our advantage when we convince CCP that that's what everyone wants.


I'm hoping you're wrong. I think hi-sec is fine as it is now. If it became completely pvp free, it would be a complete disaster imho.

I just don't understand null sec players.

**Please note: **Anytime I use the phrase PvP in a post, I'm talking about shooting/combat/killing things/blowing things up. Thank you.
Dave Stark
#39 - 2012-11-03 21:55:58 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Jaison Savrin wrote:
Willingly having your ship blown up isn't a risk.
Risk = cost × probability. For p=1, risk = cost.

It's still a risk in and of itself, and then you combine it with the risks in the pay-out, and with the simple logic that, if you want to claim that it's no risk just because you have a 100% probability, you should campaign for CONCORD only having a 50% response rate so the gankers' risk increases…

Oh, and your every-day operating costs are risks too — just ones that you can predict with a high degree of certainty (surprise, surprise).



If I run a company and I know that every single time I turn on a machine it will cost me $300 an hour to run it and I also know I need to run it for 5 hours a day to create a product then I know the cost will be 300*5 per day. It is not a "risk" that I will be charged $1,500 a day. It is an operating cost of running my business.

If I know it takes 10 Tornadoes of a specific fit to kill a max skill freighter and I know that each Tornado costs me 75 mil to buy and fit. I know that a max skill freighter will cost me 75*10 million. With the cargo scanners it is extremely simple to approximate the amount of cargo and the value in a freighter. From there it is a simple bit of math to figure out the probable profit. The only risk is the loot fairy being evil. It puts the risk of gankinig on the same plane as PvEing for rare drops.


The numbers in the second paragraph are probably woefully wrong but my point stands.


Operating costs only become risks in an extremely unstable market. Even then risks in ganking are extremely easy to mitigate and most of them are occurring before the freighter even knows they are being targeted.

Ganking is relatively risk free. I never said "too" risk free. I don't mind ganking. I just think it is really dumb for people to claim it is a risky occupation. Admit y'all, you're just playing around shooting fish in a barrel.


the flaw in your analogy is that you will turn on your machines, and you will produce product.

a gankworthy freighter might not come through all day, and you produce nothing. you're comparing fixed costs to variable costs.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#40 - 2012-11-03 21:58:14 UTC
Jaison Savrin wrote:


Ganking is relatively risk free. I never said "too" risk free. I don't mind ganking. I just think it is really dumb for people to claim it is a risky occupation. Admit y'all, you're just playing around shooting fish in a barrel.


Ganka ship with 20 bil in the cargo. Nothing drops.

1 billion in lost ships, sec status loss, killrights for attacked corp, GCC for 15 min, no insurance payout, possibility of other people scooping your loot, suddenly war targets and counter ganked.

Yep, not risky at all!