EVE General Discussion

Mother of GOD! Like with most other whines, all the tools are ingame already.

Put tank on that hauler/hulk. Don't autopilot your hulk with plexes in cargo. Don't autopilot. Don't be a colossal moron and fill you crap little ship with 100s on millions worth of stuff.

And even if you do, you can still not get ganked. People have been transporting billions worth of **** in their transports for years and never been ganked, because they don't act brain dead like most of the whiners here.

Seriously, who really dies to suicide ganks? Pretty much the stupid/lazy/self entitled clueless tools. Occasionally someone that isn't in that category but guess what, those ganks are planned and carefully coordinated (oh noes effort). People who take the effort to not be soft easy targets, will rarely be one.

So what you're really saying (all the tear providers), it's logical and honorable and fair play to continue being a dumbass and a lazy **** therefore some arbitrary mechanic should be put in place to balance out you tardness?

You think insurance removal will stop ganks? Hint: no it won't. A shield extender and some hardeners on you vessel will.

Now stop being stupid.

Indeed. We wouldn't want to make the universe a cold harsh environment for ya.

Would you care in elaborating what these serious consequences are so we can discuss them in detail? How do the losses and consequences the suicide ganker incurs stack up to the losses of the miner?



Funny that. I thought insurance did exactly that. And I'm sure their losses have some meaning. The question is how much of a meaning do they have? How 'cold' and 'harsh' are these consequences you speak of? You and I both know there is little to no skill involved in suicide ganking. And most importantly, Tippia, you know very well that these consequences are bullshit. All you need is the will to ruin someone else's gameplay and in this game that doesn't seem to be in low supply.



I don't disagree with you that everything has consequence. But that's not what is in discussion here. Rather, the OP is quantifying these consequences and stacking them versus what the consequences to the miner are. How much is a miner losing versus the suicide ganker? Hi sec suicide gankers could run about all day long, day after day, suicide ganking. Would a single miner be able to sustain these many losses due to his consequences?



Oh but it is being explained. And you can deny it all you want. The fact is that these consequences you put on a pedestal as significant to the ganker really aren't. To be honest, I really don't care if CCP fixes them or not, because unlike crybaby Schadefreude-ridden gankers who threaten to rage-quit every time CCP even considers adding risk to their tear-causing profession, I move on. But it STILL doesnt change the fact that a suicide gank loss is SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than a miner's loss.

You do understand why CONCORD was buffed in hi sec, right? If not, ask any ex-M0o to spell it for ya.

i routinely forget to insure my battleships

somehow, it hasn't stopped me

I am all for Suicide gankers receiving no insurance for pirate actions.

If they are flagged as a criminal they should not receive the benefits of being a law abiding citizen.

I feel that Concord should also be able to pod the pirates

And the fact remains that this is completely irrelevant. How much does the miner earn between each loss? How much does the ganker earn between each loss? Your fact assumption is that the miner loses ships faster than he can earn them and/or that the ganker has a significant profit. This has yet to be proven. Moreover, it just reinforces the lesson that the miners refuse to learn: they can mitigate their risk, and if they choose not to, then it's their problem — not an issue with the mechanics surrounding ganking. Their bad decisions do not make the game unbalanced.
…which makes it uninformed drivel since the insurance does indeed not pay the bill.
No. Learn the mechanics before complaining about them. Shooting them is not suicide ganking.
Yes, and you do understand that with a nerfed CONCORD, you could do unto the gankers what the gankers do unto you… even more so than what you can now (and you can already do quite a lot, if you choose to — the problem is that people instead choose to be victims, and then want to blame others for that choice).

"Loss of assets"
Insurance.

"Loss of standings"
Yes. I'm sure a suicide ganker is devastated over going from a -10 to a... -10.

"Loss of time"
Except that to ill-adjusted kiddies whose purpose is to ruin people's play time that's exactly the reason why they invest their time on Eve.

"Kill rights"
This is the only reasonable consequence to a suicide ganker. I'll give you that. But it still does not address the disparity in quantifiable losses between ganker and gankee.



This is utter nonsense and I think you yourself realize this.



And again, you're arguing semantics. I'm sure that technically there is still a financial loss however minute (LOL). Again, how much is this loss? How does it compare to the miner's losses?



It is not irrelevant. Have you ever mined in high sec? Do you even realize how much a hulk loss would set you off EVEN WITH INSURANCE? Now think about the losses a suicide ganker incurs, and as we did with the miner, consider insurance payout.