These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Sucide ganking. Alternatives?

First post
Author
The Apostle
Doomheim
#21 - 2011-10-27 01:02:07 UTC
The Crushah wrote:
I personally like suicide ganking. Its a challenge. Im also quite certain CCP has no intention of eliminating that aspect of the game.

Now that we are done theorycrafting, would you so kindly inform me as to the whereabouts of your mining craft? I would appreciate it.

Already said I sold 'em all.

And I'm asking for MORE deaths, not less. Let's put pew pew into highsec for REAL.... Have you got what it takes?

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Ratling Saraki
Ratling Saraki Corporation
#22 - 2011-10-27 01:20:00 UTC
One of the big issues is that you can easily lose an expensive (>100M isk) mining ship to a cheap T1 combat ship.

So what if a Hulk cost a tenth of its current price ?

No big loss = no worries.

Serene Repose
#23 - 2011-10-27 01:20:09 UTC
The great unsaid here....why not find other PvP-ers and shoot your hearts out (literally)? You shoot. They shoot. You shoot...

Why drag the entire EVE population into some psychopathic hunger for chaos? Why can't the ones who like to do it, do it. The ones who aren't interested as their interests lie elsewhere NOT do it?

The great unsaid...honestly answer that. Why?

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#24 - 2011-10-27 01:27:22 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:


The great unsaid...honestly answer that. Why?


I believe the answer to this is something like:

This in EVE

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes

The Apostle
Doomheim
#25 - 2011-10-27 01:45:39 UTC
Ratling Saraki wrote:
One of the big issues is that you can easily lose an expensive (>100M isk) mining ship to a cheap T1 combat ship.

So what if a Hulk cost a tenth of its current price ?

No big loss = no worries.


The market dictates the cost and the resources are contained by a few.

We could make the insurance as commensurate with the loss as it is for the ganker. Economy can still revolve around the gank and the miner goes back and does it again.... and again...... adding more impetus to the economy.

It's the easy solution and would also make T2 more used (if insured) which in turn also adds to T2 resource value which aids in making 0.0 moons more valuable which makes protecting or capturing more of said moons valuable etc. etc....

But that's logical, too simple and requires no thought.

This is EVE.

It's gotta be complicated, unjustifiable, convoluted and silly before it's accepted. Smile

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

The Apostle
Doomheim
#26 - 2011-10-27 01:48:03 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
The great unsaid here....why not find other PvP-ers and shoot your hearts out (literally)? You shoot. They shoot. You shoot...

Why drag the entire EVE population into some psychopathic hunger for chaos? Why can't the ones who like to do it, do it. The ones who aren't interested as their interests lie elsewhere NOT do it?

The great unsaid...honestly answer that. Why?

Which is my point. They have to war-dec. The war-decced simply hop corps or join NPC to avoid fighting.

And PvP'ers traditionally shoot back. They might die.

It's Eve. The weak die trying, the strong get to run away.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Rhinanna
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2011-10-27 01:51:49 UTC
Roadkill Rhino wrote:

So you think that all the miners, who probably mine because it can be done semi passively, are suddenly going to jump for joy at the idea of some minigame being added to mining. I can see it being fun for 5 minutes. Now see them doing this minigame over and over every time you mine and then see if people still find it fun.

Let's not forget to add minigames to npcing, mission running and also pvp, weeeeeeeeee! Fun times ahead for all!

Infact, let's just take a page out of one of those Perfect World games and have everyone get 5 daily free spins on a lucky wheel, either you win an average amount of ore, a lot of ore, or you win an entire built ship. Win win!

I only mine because it doesn't require my full attention, if I wanted to play harder, I would dualbox missions instead.


Ah so basically you want free ISK without playing the game... I see.

Answer is NO........

Mission running is meant to be more profitable because its more risky, this is something that needs to be addressed and probably can easily be addressed by making the bots use closer to sleeper AI. Mission running vs bots IS a mini-game of it's own.

But, you shouldn't be able to make loads of ISK while AFK (excepting of course if its just delayed ISK from time spent previously, aka reaction POSes e.t.c.)

As for market traders been 'risk-less', not really, they risk any money they invest in the market, doesn't take much for a particular goods to drop below the price they paid for it.

I can't really comment too much on the industry side other than that it seems to require quite a lot of time vs the effort put in, so I don't really have a problem with it been safe.

BTW, I've got billions of ISK, not rich in EvE scale but enough to keep me in sub-caps for a long while and every single ISK of that I've made while ACTIVE and at my keyboard. Not trying to get freebies while spanking my monkey like other people seem to want to do. If you aren't enjoying your ISK making activity, find one you do. There are plenty of ways to do it out there.

-The sword is only as sharp as the one who wields it! Other names: Drenzul (WoT, WoW, Lineage 2, WarH, BloodBowl, BSG, SC2 and lots more) 

The Apostle
Doomheim
#28 - 2011-10-27 02:06:56 UTC
Rhinanna wrote:
Roadkill Rhino wrote:

I only mine because it doesn't require my full attention, if I wanted to play harder, I would dualbox missions instead.


Ah so basically you want free ISK without playing the game... I see.

Answer is NO........

Mission running is meant to be more profitable because its more risky, this is something that needs to be addressed and probably can easily be addressed by making the bots use closer to sleeper AI. Mission running vs bots IS a mini-game of it's own.


Missioning can be done AFK exactly like mining.

Fully insured Domi. Check. Tank. Check. Aggro. Check. Drones. Check. Go watch TV. Dualbox means you got 2 domis doing it.

A miner on veld makes 3-5/hr and risks 200m. A domi can make 20m/hr. and would lose maybe 20m if ganked - which they can't be without serious alpha or numbers to do it.

And passive income? pffft.... 0.0 alliances have moons pulling billion upon billions per month. Risky? If it's deep inside the alliance, even if a massive fleet came and SBU'd the system, broke the POS and stole the moon, his chance of keeping that moon are pretty damn small without a massive invasion to back it up. See any major alliances fighting lately? Nope. They're in highsec beating up miners making less than 3m an hour.

What about all the PI done in 0.0? Hundreds of millions of passive income.

What about datacores? I make 90m every 2 weeks doing NOTHING with a couple of alts.

So as a Hulk pilot, I am scum of the universe because I make 3-5/hr. Yessir, kill 'em all. Greedy pigs all.

The arguments being used against miners is totally and absolutely flawed.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

supersexysucker
Uber Awesome Fantastico Awesomeness Group
#29 - 2011-10-27 07:54:30 UTC
Not an issue... been ganked, my own fault... life goes on.

I do like the war dec a corp forever plan lol. Could have them pay to be undeced so they could leave rofl.
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
#30 - 2011-10-27 08:09:36 UTC
I don't think suicide ganking is the issue here - it's been around since the beginning and it is right that nobody is completely safe anywhere.

The problem is with the way mining works, and with the ships that miners have to use. Miners have to sit stationary in isolated locations for extended periods of time. Mining ships have poor tanks, and if fit to optimise their mining ability they have almost no tank at all.

They have ways to mitigate the risks (and as they have all been repeated dozens of times in 100's of threads I won't repeat them here) but none of them really works.

By making player mining such a broken profession CCP play into the hands of the botters.

Re-designing mining ships to give them greater survivability is one way to improve the situation, but the profession would still be bot friendly. What they need to do is to re-design the mining profession. Get rid of mining ships completely and implement a deployable mining platform that would be anchored in a belt to do the actual mining, and change the miners role to "defender of the mining platform"
Zoe Alarhun
The Proactive Reappropriation Corporation
#31 - 2011-10-27 10:07:52 UTC
Why don't miners just use the Caldari rokh battleship to mine during times of trouble ? Can't you fit a pretty hefty tank on one of those things (enough so that common suicide ships don't have enough firepower to take em down before concordokken) while still maintaining a reasonable mining output ? Didn't miners use them before the mining barges where introduced ?
The Apostle
Doomheim
#32 - 2011-10-27 10:11:54 UTC
Zoe Alarhun wrote:
Why don't miners just use the Caldari rokh battleship to mine during times of trouble ? Can't you fit a pretty hefty tank on one of those things (enough so that common suicide ships don't have enough firepower to take em down before concordokken) while still maintaining a reasonable mining output ? Didn't miners use them before the mining barges where introduced ?

Yes. But as even baltec showed, concerted ganking can kill anything.

Tank is not and never will be enough. It's a flawed mechanic being abused.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Tanya Fox
Doomheim
#33 - 2011-10-27 10:20:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Tanya Fox
The Apostle wrote:

Many arguments stem from the fact that miners should not be risk free and nor should they be able to make isk risk free. It's said that it should be allowed for 'economic' reasons ad nauseum.

However, the same should also be said for mission runners but we know they can't be ganked without serious firepower and dedication. So the whole concept of preventing "risk free income" in highsec is void right there.

If we accept that this is the reasoning behind ganking, we must also ask why suicide ganking is actually neccessary. Why not war-dec and get the free kill? No Concord and no sec status hit. Why indeed?

It's because half the miners (an assumption) sit in NPC corps - many are bots. Even if they join a "real" corp they can simply hop corps on a war-dec. They have MADE mining a relatively risk free pasttime and suicide ganking is the ONLY way to counter it.

With this in mind why should we not seek changes to provide for greater PvP opportunities AND allow for both economic, strategic and tactical advantages by killing both miners AND missioners.


You're making the mistake of thinking that many of the miners in an NPC corp are bots, they're not. It is true that mining is a boring profession with the mining mechanics of the game and as such a lot of miners semi-afk whislt they mine but they're not botting.

Ofc there are bots in the game but they're equally just as much in player corporations.

I don't see your posts as having anything really constructive in them, it seems you're pushing your own agenda whilst trying to disguise it a bit.



The Apostle wrote:


This can only be done with 2 changes imho

1) Remove the ability to stay in an NPC for greater than some arbitrary time. (eg: 90 days). Failure to join a corp involves seizure of assets until you do..


Some reasons why people stay in NPC corps in no particular order:

1) A lot of the players corps for want of a better word are crap.
2) There are quite a few of the smaller player corps that have 100+ listed but only about 10 actually play on a regular basis.
3) There are more players in an NPC corp than most player corps (not talking about alliances).
4) People have time commitments in RL so do not want to commit to a player corp.
5) Players can play the game the way they want without the corp imposing their playstyle on them.
6) Player corps impose restrictions like how many sp you have to have before they will consider even allowing you to join.
7) Player corps are too nosey some want full disclosure on your character before they will consider you. And a lot of player think it's non of their business.
8) Small player corps can be frequently war-dec'd because the war-decing corp wants easy kills to boost their killmails.

Actually killmails and ranks are the worst thing that can happen to a pvp game, because it does not promote pvp it just promotes ganking.

I'm sure I could add to that list, but I think you get the picture.

If you did get what you want in number 1, you would just see another large wave of people leave Eve, so you would have even less people playing. In some ways it could be entertaining because the weaker gankers would become the ganked.





The Apostle wrote:

2) Once a war-dec has been declared, NO members can either leave or join during the declaration.

Ofc, the miners still need some kind of protection from mindless violence when there are now more ways to kill them, validly and legitimately. An inability to target unarmed vessels UNLESS war-decced is a potential option.

And ofc, there are those that say this makes for 'consensual PvP' and to some extent it does. But war-dec mechanics exist in highsec for a reason and we should be making these mechanics far more effective. At the moment they're as good as pointless.

The alternative is to invalidate the entire concept of highsec, remove the neccessity to war-dec, remove Concord and let players decide who lives or dies. A true sandbox.

To be frank, it won't make the slightest difference to miners whether highsec, Concord or any such measures exist. They're dying anyway. Let's get highsec missioners and all other risk free isk makers in on the killmails as well.

Discuss....


This is where your real agenda is, making high-sec more of a PvP area.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#34 - 2011-10-27 10:34:40 UTC
Tanya Fox wrote:
This is where your really agenda is, making high-sec more of a PvP area.

You got it. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. But my reasons are not so obvious.

By doing as I am suggesting, "fighting men" will become targets ALL DAY, EVERY DAY, EVERY WHERE.

They ALL use highsec for SAFETY because they CANNOT be reasonably ganked before Concord. This very safety allows THEM to fly around as long as those that cannot tank are dead meat.

And the whole while, MINERS and UNARMED industrials should STOP WHINING because they ARE targets. "Sandbox", "This is Eve" ad nauseam.

My point is to prove that "fighting men" DO NOT want this. It's a double bluff and the responses are proving this very fact.

Miners are already stuffed. Let's ADD missioners, Incursion runners and EVERY combat vessel to higshec killmails and stop being shallow, lazy cowards with excuses that do NOT apply to the people saying it.

They will fight this because it will **** up THEIR game. I knew this BEFORE I posted. It's why I did. Some people just haven't worked it out yet.

+1

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Zoe Alarhun
The Proactive Reappropriation Corporation
#35 - 2011-10-27 10:35:59 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
Zoe Alarhun wrote:
Why don't miners just use the Caldari rokh battleship to mine during times of trouble ? Can't you fit a pretty hefty tank on one of those things (enough so that common suicide ships don't have enough firepower to take em down before concordokken) while still maintaining a reasonable mining output ? Didn't miners use them before the mining barges where introduced ?

Yes. But as even baltec showed, concerted ganking can kill anything.

Tank is not and never will be enough. It's a flawed mechanic being abused.


Concerted ganking can kill anything - that's how firepower works. There's only a finite amount of health while you can apply a theoretical infinite amount of dps if you have enough people/ships.

But right now people are complaining about brutixes/Thrashers killing their stuff solo. A rokh can fit a big enough tank so that neither of those ships can take it out quickly. If there's a bunch of them, if you spot them on scan roaming towards you (because groups of battlecruisers/battleship don't just hang a round belts). If you stay aligned you can warp out easliy. You have decent tank to take the small guys.

When the ganking craze dies down you can go back to flying barges. What is the problem ?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#36 - 2011-10-27 10:37:50 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
Miners are already stuffed. Let's ADD missioners, Incursion runners and EVERY combat vessel to higshec killmails and stop being shallow, lazy cowards with excuses that do NOT apply to the people saying it.
Yes. Let's add the people who are already on those killmails. Wait what? Ugh
Ann133566
Doomheim
#37 - 2011-10-27 10:37:58 UTC
I have no big issues with miners, everyone should be able to play the game as they please. However it has low gameplay engagement along with plexing and ratting and missioning. All you have to do is click target and fire. Any fool can do that, there is no skill and knowhow involved. Frankly it's dull and low risk and needs a shakeup, for example spawning a tough NPC that tackles and does enough DPSt o make miners, missioners to at least worry their empty little heads instead of these rats that pop if u sneeze of them.

Nothing should be risk free in the game, the fact that bots can do these things, says a lot. Playing EVE should never be a comfortable experience. Everyone from missioners, miners, plexers and pvpers should always be looking over their shoulders and should be punnished for falling asleep at the wheel.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#38 - 2011-10-27 10:40:54 UTC
Zoe Alarhun wrote:
The Apostle wrote:
Zoe Alarhun wrote:
Why don't miners just use the Caldari rokh battleship to mine during times of trouble ? Can't you fit a pretty hefty tank on one of those things (enough so that common suicide ships don't have enough firepower to take em down before concordokken) while still maintaining a reasonable mining output ? Didn't miners use them before the mining barges where introduced ?

Yes. But as even baltec showed, concerted ganking can kill anything.

Tank is not and never will be enough. It's a flawed mechanic being abused.


Concerted ganking can kill anything - that's how firepower works. There's only a finite amount of health while you can apply a theoretical infinite amount of dps if you have enough people/ships.

But right now people are complaining about brutixes/Thrashers killing their stuff solo. A rokh can fit a big enough tank so that neither of those ships can take it out quickly. If there's a bunch of them, if you spot them on scan roaming towards you (because groups of battlecruisers/battleship don't just hang a round belts). If you stay aligned you can warp out easliy. You have decent tank to take the small guys.

When the ganking craze dies down you can go back to flying barges. What is the problem ?

G**ns are even killing Orcas mate. My point is no ship is safe - ever - but more so industrials. My argument is, and always has been that suicide ganking in highsec IS illegal (check the repercussions for doing it) but accepted.

It's deemed "neccessary" to kill industrials because guys who want to blow **** up cannot reasonably kill COMBAT vessels.

The mechanic is one sided and broken.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

The Apostle
Doomheim
#39 - 2011-10-27 10:44:09 UTC
Tippia wrote:
The Apostle wrote:
Miners are already stuffed. Let's ADD missioners, Incursion runners and EVERY combat vessel to higshec killmails and stop being shallow, lazy cowards with excuses that do NOT apply to the people saying it.
Yes. Let's add the people who are already on those killmails. Wait what? Ugh

wha???

Under war-dec. Yes. Suicide gank. Rare.

Maybe you mean the gankers? Killmails? Concord doesn't keep one.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Zoe Alarhun
The Proactive Reappropriation Corporation
#40 - 2011-10-27 10:50:39 UTC
The Apostle wrote:
Zoe Alarhun wrote:
The Apostle wrote:
Zoe Alarhun wrote:
Why don't miners just use the Caldari rokh battleship to mine during times of trouble ? Can't you fit a pretty hefty tank on one of those things (enough so that common suicide ships don't have enough firepower to take em down before concordokken) while still maintaining a reasonable mining output ? Didn't miners use them before the mining barges where introduced ?

Yes. But as even baltec showed, concerted ganking can kill anything.

Tank is not and never will be enough. It's a flawed mechanic being abused.


Concerted ganking can kill anything - that's how firepower works. There's only a finite amount of health while you can apply a theoretical infinite amount of dps if you have enough people/ships.

But right now people are complaining about brutixes/Thrashers killing their stuff solo. A rokh can fit a big enough tank so that neither of those ships can take it out quickly. If there's a bunch of them, if you spot them on scan roaming towards you (because groups of battlecruisers/battleship don't just hang a round belts). If you stay aligned you can warp out easliy. You have decent tank to take the small guys.

When the ganking craze dies down you can go back to flying barges. What is the problem ?

G**ns are even killing Orcas mate. My point is no ship is safe - ever - but more so industrials. My argument is, and always has been that suicide ganking in highsec IS illegal (check the repercussions for doing it) but accepted.

It's deemed "neccessary" to kill industrials because guys who want to blow **** up cannot reasonably kill COMBAT vessels.

The mechanic is one sided and broken.


How is it one sided - you can kill a mission ship just as easily. Some energy neuts kill most active tanks (which good mission runners use) meaning they can't rep which means the rats + you kill them. Also fit damage type that they arn't tanked against. Almost 0 risk and you don't get your ship raeped by concord.

Needless to say in low sec and nullsec combat vessels get blown up all the time. What is the problem with suicide ganking ?