These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Should Ganking be profitable?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#21 - 2013-03-19 07:44:04 UTC
only if that profit comes from cargo.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#22 - 2013-03-19 07:47:07 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
only if that profit comes from cargo.

Why? What difference does it make where on the ship the loot comes from?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#23 - 2013-03-19 07:48:11 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
only if that profit comes from cargo.


[Ibis, Not Cargo: must be safe]

Draclira's Modified Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Draclira's Modified Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Estamel's Modified Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Estamel's Modified Adaptive Invulnerability Field

True Sansha Small Energy Neutralizer
True Sansha Small Energy Neutralizer

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#24 - 2013-03-19 08:03:09 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Dev soundwave wrote.

"Yeah my point is that I don't think they should be profitable to gank. I think it should be possible, but not necessarily profitable (profitable might be the wrong word, but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender)."

What is everyones opinion?


Maybe it shouldn't be profitable to gank properly fitted, actively pilot ships. But nothing in EVE should be balanced around untanked ships and especially not around AFKing.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#25 - 2013-03-19 08:28:02 UTC
In Eve everyone should have the opportunity to get successful with his business model. Not everyone is able to gank profitable but if you know how you can earn the one or the other isk. If you are solo you´d need quite a few alts but CCP likes people with multiple accounts because they mean money.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
monkfish2345
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#26 - 2013-03-19 09:30:52 UTC
it's fairly straightforward there are pretty much 2 reasons which 'should' leading to killings in high sec.

1) ship is carrying very valuable stuffs in a way that makes it vulnerable
2) the pilot is an enemy of yours.

the problem is the second point should come under war dec'd targets, but with plain ganking so isk efficient there is little to no reason to pay to have a war created. another result of this is that you can deem anybody to be a target.

All that said ships getting blown up is good news and helps the economy. and for players that fit ships properly there is little to no risk.

it's pretty much the same as everything in eve, if you are/act stupid, expect to become a target.
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
#27 - 2013-03-19 09:44:20 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Dev soundwave wrote.

"Yeah my point is that I don't think they should be profitable to gank. I think it should be possible, but not necessarily profitable (profitable might be the wrong word, but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender)."

What is everyones opinion?


It is the player being ganked that determines whether or not it is profitable to gank them, not CCP. A low value ship, fittings and cargo is far less likely to be ganked than a pimped out ship carrying BPOs. That assumes that the purpose of the ganking is for profit though because there is more than one reason to gank someone without wardeccing them first.

Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#28 - 2013-03-19 09:53:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
only if that profit comes from cargo.

Why? What difference does it make where on the ship the loot comes from?



I'm guessing his argument comes from T2 salvage from Exhumers being ganked. Intact armour plats do a pretty good job of paying for a gank.

Of course, tanking an exhumer isn't hard these days. Sure, enough catalysts will get you. But the idea is making it not viable, rather than not possible.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Whitehound
#29 - 2013-03-19 10:18:03 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Dev soundwave wrote.

"Yeah my point is that I don't think they should be profitable to gank. I think it should be possible, but not necessarily profitable (profitable might be the wrong word, but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender)."

What is everyones opinion?

He is right. Only it is not as simple as CCP Soundwave makes it sound.

He knows there is more to it so he can make such statements, but for noobs to understand this do they first need to understand profit, and profit is not only about ship prices. It is about time and effort, ship roles, ISK/hour, production, player numbers, and lots of other things, too.

Balance is a delicate network of factors and counter factors. If one factor becomes so overwhelming that it will outweigh others, and all the time, does it become a danger to the balance. This is what he means by saying "necessarily profitable" - a factor become so strong that it will always outweigh others.

When a Hulk makes 15m ISKs/hour and costs 200m ISKs, while another ship costs 100m ISKs and makes 30m ISKs/hour, then you may have a problem.

When a ship like the Hulk needs three strip miners to fill its role and these modules cost 12m ISKs and the drop-chance is 50% resulting in 6m ISKs worth of loot, but the Hulk can be ganked by another ship costing less than 5m ISKs, then you may have a problem.

When a Hulk then needs a month and more of skill training and requires rare materials for building it, materials which have caused many great wars, but the ship can be shot down by practically a noob ship that is flown by many new players in their first week, then you may have another problem.

It is not even about high-sec and how safe it is and how safe it should be in one's opinion, but about the imbalances, which lurk in the fundamentals of the mechanic, and where factors begin to fail countering other factors.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#30 - 2013-03-19 10:30:46 UTC
If miners don't like the danger of suicide ganking, they're welcome to come to nice, safe 0.0 where there isn't any.

Admittedly, the ore isn't quite as profitable here, but that's the price one pays for safety.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Lost Greybeard
Drunken Yordles
#31 - 2013-03-19 10:36:38 UTC
There should be a balance of risk and reward, as with everything.

How it is now is basically pretty reasonable. You always have the option to pile on more defense, to mine in a safer area, etc, making it harder for people to gank you successfully at a profit.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#32 - 2013-03-19 10:59:54 UTC
Olf Barrenbur wrote:

They'll only get ganked once, then they'll learn to EVE. cry to CCP to fix mechanics because of falcon ~hisec~


FYP.

ninja edit -- wrong meme Cool

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#33 - 2013-03-19 11:06:19 UTC
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Dev soundwave wrote.

"Yeah my point is that I don't think they should be profitable to gank. I think it should be possible, but not necessarily profitable (profitable might be the wrong word, but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender)."

What is everyones opinion?


That quote was in reference the the bare hull of exhumers and barges. He thought that they were profitable to gank with no mods fitted. This was wrong and has been pointed out countless times.
aerynn jewell
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-03-19 11:16:48 UTC
Suicide ganking shouldn't be as profitable as it currently is , I think the entire mechanic should be changed to only dropping current cargo of the destroyed target ,not fittings or even a salvageable wreck, just the cargo it carries then is more akin to a hold up you can even go so far as actually ransoming the target off to drop cargo or pop it for it .

Of course you could leave the normal fit \ wreck drops as is for a war decced target ,making war deccing actually usefull for some thing.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#35 - 2013-03-19 11:20:25 UTC
Suicide ganking always has the possibility to be profitable, so long as people continue to put more and more isk into their ships. There is nothing you can really do to change that. However removing insurance payouts for concord kills is one way to raise the bar on what actually is profitable and what isn't. Plus to me, it always seemed like insurance fraud, which no actual company would payout on.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#36 - 2013-03-19 11:22:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Ganking should be an EvE philosophy thing: you get given tools (and weapons Pirate), you deal with the consequences.

In particular, the barges buff and also how freighters are made, are totally against EvE philosophy.

Barges should be profitable or unprofitable depending on how much smart (or not) their owner is, like most other ships.
Barges should be given as many slots as the other ships and then let the owner pick between yield / cargo / tank exactly like he'd do for a BC or a BS.

Many would still choose for max AFK or max yield and face the consequences.
The others could pick an intermediate setup out of dozens possible, and do a risk vs reward compromise.

In the past the barges just sucked even when tanked (except some shameful "I am bait all tank" Hulks fittings) now they have been made an one way, no choices deal. Both are wrong.

Edit: I can see the point of "those are ships that can't really dodge / flee / manouver so they deserve some "dev gods imposed buffer tank" but not as much as today. I'd shift this buffer tank "buff" more on the actual players.

Freighters should have a similar compromise and thus be "player fitted". Most of the times I don't carry but half cargo, why shouldn't I be able to tank it more giving up such space? After all it's how JFs work, less cargo for more tank (and cyno ofc).



baltec1 wrote:
HollyShocker 2inthestink wrote:
Dev soundwave wrote.

"Yeah my point is that I don't think they should be profitable to gank. I think it should be possible, but not necessarily profitable (profitable might be the wrong word, but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender)."

What is everyones opinion?


That quote was in reference the the bare hull of exhumers and barges. He thought that they were profitable to gank with no mods fitted. This was wrong and has been pointed out countless times.


Last gank times I have been involved in, the average loot I'd get was 8M+ a pop. 2 T1 fitted catalysts for 1 tanked Mack = still profitable. And it's Macks that were the "queens of AFK", even before the revamp, as they were the ices specialized ship so those are a fair meter.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Runeme Shilter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2013-03-19 11:26:22 UTC
Whitehound wrote:

When a ship like the Hulk needs three strip miners to fill its role and these modules cost 12m ISKs and the drop-chance is 50% resulting in 6m ISKs worth of loot, but the Hulk can be ganked by another ship costing less than 5m ISKs, then you may have a problem.


Could you show me the ship fitting that will kill a properly fitted Hulk for 5M ISK? I'd be very interested in that.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#38 - 2013-03-19 11:27:16 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


Last gank times I have been involved in, the average loot I'd get was 8M+ a pop. 2 T1 fitted catalysts for 1 tanked Mack = still profitable. And it's Macks that were the "queens of AFK", even before the revamp, as they were the ices specialized ship so those are a fair meter.


You have very different numbers to what we had.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#39 - 2013-03-19 11:34:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
baltec1 wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


Last gank times I have been involved in, the average loot I'd get was 8M+ a pop. 2 T1 fitted catalysts for 1 tanked Mack = still profitable. And it's Macks that were the "queens of AFK", even before the revamp, as they were the ices specialized ship so those are a fair meter.


You have very different numbers to what we had.


What numbers did you have? I found out I'd usually salvage from 0 to 2 intact armor plates. If it was not 2 plates it was some minor salvage (or a mix, 1 plate + 1 crappy salvage or no crappy salvage at all), the average was about 1 plate, which at that time I could sell for 14 to 16M a piece. Add ship dropped mods = at least 8M a pop.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Runeme Shilter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2013-03-19 11:43:27 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Last gank times I have been involved in, the average loot I'd get was 8M+ a pop. 2 T1 fitted catalysts for 1 tanked Mack = still profitable. And it's Macks that were the "queens of AFK", even before the revamp, as they were the ices specialized ship so those are a fair meter.


[Mackinaw, Mack - Ice]
Ice Harvester Upgrade I
Ice Harvester Upgrade I
Damage Control II

Small Shield Extender I
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Upgraded Thermic Dissipation Amplifier I
[empty med slot]

Ice Harvester II
Ice Harvester II

Medium Ice Harvester Accelerator I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I

32k ehp, not profitable to gank.

[Mackinaw, Mack - Ore]
Damage Control II
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade I

Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Upgraded Thermic Dissipation Amplifier I
Small Shield Extender I
[empty med slot]

Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I

Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I

34k ehp, not profitable to gank.