These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Great Ice Mining Interdiction: Not so Great

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#501 - 2013-08-23 19:43:22 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:


Because ship loss is a cost not a risk. Suicide ganking has zero risk. Success and profitability at suicide ganking has risk.


So ganking has risk then.

Glad you finally see the error of your rather ******** arguments.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#502 - 2013-08-23 19:45:35 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Ok, real talk eh?

You would have a 100% of succeeding at suiciding and dying, yes. Without fail you became a wreck.

So yes, there you go.


The goal is the destruction of the target ship and the taking of its cargo and mods.

To be risk free the target ship must die and all of its cargo must drop and be safely dropped off in a safe station 100% of the time.


I know a guy named Scordite Cowboy who ganks Ventures with a Thrasher. His failure rate is pretty low.


Can you say 100% sure he will never ever have a freak incident making him fail the gank?


One could say he might slip and fall in his shower scaring his cat to jump on the keyboard causing him to self destruct his ship.

But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#503 - 2013-08-23 19:46:50 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:


But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


There is over a 50% chance of nothing at all dropping.

This alone is a fair bit higher than 1% no?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#504 - 2013-08-23 19:47:02 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Ok, real talk eh?

You would have a 100% of succeeding at suiciding and dying, yes. Without fail you became a wreck.

So yes, there you go.


The goal is the destruction of the target ship and the taking of its cargo and mods.

To be risk free the target ship must die and all of its cargo must drop and be safely dropped off in a safe station 100% of the time.


I know a guy named Scordite Cowboy who ganks Ventures with a Thrasher. His failure rate is pretty low.


Can you say 100% sure he will never ever have a freak incident making him fail the gank?


One could say he might slip and fall in his shower scaring his cat to jump on the keyboard causing him to self destruct his ship.

But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.

Basically non existant is not non existant.
Can I get 100 guns, load 99 with blanks, and 1 with actual bullets, then 100 times, fire a random gun at your forehead?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#505 - 2013-08-23 19:47:43 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


Because no one has ever thought of scooping the loot before the ganker does.

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.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#506 - 2013-08-23 19:47:50 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Ok, real talk eh?

You would have a 100% of succeeding at suiciding and dying, yes. Without fail you became a wreck.

So yes, there you go.


The goal is the destruction of the target ship and the taking of its cargo and mods.

To be risk free the target ship must die and all of its cargo must drop and be safely dropped off in a safe station 100% of the time.



Yes. But we are not talking about success being risk free. We are talking about ship loss being risk free as to be a cost instead.

I have mentioned this more than 5 times now. You are either being deliberate or just don;t get it, or care (/shrug).


You are the one deliberately trying to focus the discussion of suicide ganking on the suicide part while everybody else discuss the whole suicide gank.



No, back in the beginning, we quite specifically went over what was risk and what were costs.


People were using the "ship loss is not a risk but a cost" to try to prove that suicide gank are 0 risk endeavor. This is false because there are still plenty of risk involved in suicide ganking for the ship loss to not change the action from riskless to risky. Suicide ganking is risky. Thats the point of the discussion because at the beginning of the thread, some tard stupidly said there was no risk in suicide ganking. It took over 20 apges to discuss this **** point and we might be done soon.

Or not...
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#507 - 2013-08-23 19:48:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


There is over a 50% chance of nothing at all dropping.

This alone is a fair bit higher than 1% no?


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#508 - 2013-08-23 19:49:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Lucas Kell wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Ok, real talk eh?

You would have a 100% of succeeding at suiciding and dying, yes. Without fail you became a wreck.

So yes, there you go.


The goal is the destruction of the target ship and the taking of its cargo and mods.

To be risk free the target ship must die and all of its cargo must drop and be safely dropped off in a safe station 100% of the time.



Yes. But we are not talking about success being risk free. We are talking about ship loss being risk free as to be a cost instead.

I have mentioned this more than 5 times now. You are either being deliberate or just don;t get it, or care (/shrug).

I think you are misunderstanding the whole situation dude.
The argument is: Is susicide gankign a risk free endeavour.
The answer is no. Ignoring costs, ship loss, profits, etc as they are measures of level of success, the success of the operation is you kill the target, the failure of the operation is the target does not die. You can minimise the odds of failure by using more ships, higher DPS and through player skill, the same as any other endeavour.



The point, is that we are not talking about the entire situation, even though a few of you ARE starting to derail the topic into that.

Suicide ganking is the act of shooting a target without a mechanic in place to protect you from Concord. To eliminate a target before Concord arrives, and so that target dies.

Whether he has anything in his hold is an argument on WHY you are killing that target.

Want a for instance? Say I get paid to kill someone. Grief the **** out of him, hellcamp him, make his day terrible.

I don't care if he is in a noobship or a freighter, he is in my sights. Someone paid me to do it, or got me to do it for ANY reason (baptism by fire?).

Profit has nothing to do with it. This is where your "entire situation" rings false. This is where your absolute does not fit the bill.

As it applies to the ice interdiction, even an empty no profit suicide gank HELPS and is good because it gets the word out! Your currency and "profit" was the fact that people won't TRY to mine. Which helps ice prices just the same.

That is where "riskless" pvp happens with suicide ganking. If I get paid 100m bounty per hulk during hulkageddon, and I kill hulks with 0 cargo and 0 drops, my suicide gank was not a fail was it? I got the km and the bounty paid. The cargo hold is bonus.

Oh wait, let me interject... that would be a specific circumstance wouldn't it? So maybe we should go back to talking about ship loss and death by Concord being a cost over a risk because it's a constant we can depend on as a game mechanic as opposed to the risks of loot fairy or even success eh?

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#509 - 2013-08-23 19:50:08 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.


99% of gankers do care about the money.

That's like saying all mission runners don't care about the isk.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#510 - 2013-08-23 19:50:54 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


There is over a 50% chance of nothing at all dropping.

This alone is a fair bit higher than 1% no?


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.


And on the other end of the spectrum, the guys suicide ganking freighters for profit actually care about the money. Once again, attempting to pidgeon-hole suicide ganking in to singular acts.

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.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#511 - 2013-08-23 19:51:15 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


There is over a 50% chance of nothing at all dropping.

This alone is a fair bit higher than 1% no?


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.


What if his target has an infamous falcon alt cloaked nearby locking him until CONCORD arrive? Is that impossible or is there a risk that it will happen?
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#512 - 2013-08-23 19:53:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.


99% of gankers do care about the money.

That's like saying all mission runners don't care about the isk.


I don't think this is a true statement when it comes to miner ganking.

Freighter and indy ganking yes.

Miner ganking no.

I know severeal people (not including Scordite Cowboy) who kill miners out of spite. They don't bother to come and try to loot the ship because that is not their goal.

And when I see Goons kill miners there is no one there to get the loot usually. I sat for 15 minutes and watched a freighter wreck and no one bothered to loot it because it was probaly a pain to haul 500 units of ice.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#513 - 2013-08-23 19:56:20 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Ok, real talk eh?

You would have a 100% of succeeding at suiciding and dying, yes. Without fail you became a wreck.

So yes, there you go.


The goal is the destruction of the target ship and the taking of its cargo and mods.

To be risk free the target ship must die and all of its cargo must drop and be safely dropped off in a safe station 100% of the time.



Yes. But we are not talking about success being risk free. We are talking about ship loss being risk free as to be a cost instead.

I have mentioned this more than 5 times now. You are either being deliberate or just don;t get it, or care (/shrug).

I think you are misunderstanding the whole situation dude.
The argument is: Is susicide gankign a risk free endeavour.
The answer is no. Ignoring costs, ship loss, profits, etc as they are measures of level of success, the success of the operation is you kill the target, the failure of the operation is the target does not die. You can minimise the odds of failure by using more ships, higher DPS and through player skill, the same as any other endeavour.



The point, is that we are not talking about the entire situation, even though a few of you ARE starting to derail the topic into that.

Suicide ganking is the act of shooting a target without a mechanic in place to protect you from Concord. To eliminate a target before Concord arrives, and so that target dies.

Whether he has anything in his hold is an argument on WHY you are killing that target.

Want a for instance? Say I get paid to kill someone. Grief the **** out of him, hellcamp him, make his day terrible.

I don't care if he is in a noobship or a freighter, he is in my sights. Someone paid me to do it, or got me to do it for ANY reason (baptism by fire?).

Profit has nothing to do with it. This is where your "entire situation" rings false. This is where your absolute does not fit the bill.

As it applies to the ice interdiction, even an empty no profit suicide gank HELPS and is good because it gets the word out! Your currency and "profit" was the fact that people won't TRY to mine. Which helps ice prices just the same.

That is where "riskless" pvp happens wuich suicide ganking. If I get paid 100m bounty per hulk during hulkageddon, and I kill hulks with 0 cargo and 0 drops, my suicide gank was not a fail was it? I got the km and the bounty paid. The cargo hold is bonus.

Oh wait, let me interject... that would be a specific circumstance wouldn't it? So maybe we should go back to talking about ship loss and death by Concord being a cost over a risk because it's a constant we can depend on as a game mechanic as opposed to the risks of loot fairy or even success eh?

**** off lol. Starting to derail the topic. This is about the results from the ice interdiction thus far. It's already derailed by people talking about whether they think ganking is or isn't risky, and now you want to argue about the circumstance of the gank.

The gank is a fail if the target is alive at the end of it. That can and does happen. That's the risk. Any circumstance around that is entirely beside the point. The WHY you are doing it, and the resulting profit and loss is secondary to the objective which is target X must die. If you execute the gank, and target X lives, the operation was a failure. If he is dead, the operation was a success. I really don;t know how you don't get that.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#514 - 2013-08-23 19:56:32 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


There is over a 50% chance of nothing at all dropping.

This alone is a fair bit higher than 1% no?


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.


What if his target has an infamous falcon alt cloaked nearby locking him until CONCORD arrive? Is that impossible or is there a risk that it will happen?


Its probaly less than 1% so its like worrying about getting hit with a car while sitting in your living room.

No one is going to be protecting a venture with a cloaked ship.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#515 - 2013-08-23 19:57:18 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:


I don't think this is a true statement when it comes to miner ganking.



We intend to make hundreds of billions in profit. Also go look at the ice we are interdicting and what ice is in CFC space.


[/quote]
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#516 - 2013-08-23 19:57:53 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Ok, real talk eh?

You would have a 100% of succeeding at suiciding and dying, yes. Without fail you became a wreck.

So yes, there you go.


The goal is the destruction of the target ship and the taking of its cargo and mods.

To be risk free the target ship must die and all of its cargo must drop and be safely dropped off in a safe station 100% of the time.



Yes. But we are not talking about success being risk free. We are talking about ship loss being risk free as to be a cost instead.

I have mentioned this more than 5 times now. You are either being deliberate or just don;t get it, or care (/shrug).

I think you are misunderstanding the whole situation dude.
The argument is: Is susicide gankign a risk free endeavour.
The answer is no. Ignoring costs, ship loss, profits, etc as they are measures of level of success, the success of the operation is you kill the target, the failure of the operation is the target does not die. You can minimise the odds of failure by using more ships, higher DPS and through player skill, the same as any other endeavour.



The point, is that we are not talking about the entire situation, even though a few of you ARE starting to derail the topic into that.

Suicide ganking is the act of shooting a target without a mechanic in place to protect you from Concord. To eliminate a target before Concord arrives, and so that target dies.

Whether he has anything in his hold is an argument on WHY you are killing that target.

Want a for instance? Say I get paid to kill someone. Grief the **** out of him, hellcamp him, make his day terrible.

I don't care if he is in a noobship or a freighter, he is in my sights. Someone paid me to do it, or got me to do it for ANY reason (baptism by fire?).

Profit has nothing to do with it. This is where your "entire situation" rings false. This is where your absolute does not fit the bill.

As it applies to the ice interdiction, even an empty no profit suicide gank HELPS and is good because it gets the word out! Your currency and "profit" was the fact that people won't TRY to mine. Which helps ice prices just the same.

That is where "riskless" pvp happens wuich suicide ganking. If I get paid 100m bounty per hulk during hulkageddon, and I kill hulks with 0 cargo and 0 drops, my suicide gank was not a fail was it? I got the km and the bounty paid. The cargo hold is bonus.

Oh wait, let me interject... that would be a specific circumstance wouldn't it? So maybe we should go back to talking about ship loss and death by Concord being a cost over a risk because it's a constant we can depend on as a game mechanic as opposed to the risks of loot fairy or even success eh?


But you can still slip and miss your gank. Thats why it's not riskless. Everything is only a cost if you don't analyse the goal of such expense. It's like you are saying sex without protection is riskless because we will all die at some spoint.

Operation Barbarossa was not risky because it only ever cost divisions right?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#517 - 2013-08-23 20:00:32 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


But seriously. The average risk is less than 1%. Which means its basically non-existant.


There is over a 50% chance of nothing at all dropping.

This alone is a fair bit higher than 1% no?


The dude is killing ventures with a thrasher. I don't think loot is part of the equation.

And he says he doesn't care about the money.


What if his target has an infamous falcon alt cloaked nearby locking him until CONCORD arrive? Is that impossible or is there a risk that it will happen?


Its probaly less than 1% so its like worrying about getting hit with a car while sitting in your living room.

No one is going to be protecting a venture with a cloaked ship.


I wish inssurance ompany would think your way cuz I would be getting tonmore protection for the same price.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#518 - 2013-08-23 20:02:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:


Because ship loss is a cost not a risk. Suicide ganking has zero risk. Success and profitability at suicide ganking has risk.


So ganking has risk then.

Glad you finally see the error of your rather ******** arguments.



Lordy you are thick. Suicide ganking has 0 risk for ship loss, or rather, should say 100% cost for ship loss.

Success rates and profitability at suicide ganking has risk.

You are a dumb rock aren't you? First you want "no reading between the lines" now you want 1 word to mean 20.

Man the **** up. Just watch your gifs and click F1 dude, let the big boys talk.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#519 - 2013-08-23 20:04:09 UTC

Murk Paradox wrote:

Georgina Parmala wrote:

No. Concord will not blow you up resulting in a 1 or a 0.


I don't understand the "no" part.

I bet it's the part in Bold that you're missing, creating said confusion. The result is not binary.

Murk Paradox wrote:
Are you saying you can survive Concord if you violence an unwilling party? You do not "risk" anything if you know you are going to get blown up. There's no "chance" since you know it is a guaranteed direct result.


Whether you believe a 100% probability to indicate no risk is irrelevant, because fortunately it's not the case in a suicide gank.

Yes I am saying you can "survive concord" and there is an element of chance involved on multiple levels in this, creating a risk factor where P =/= 1.The only time P approaches 1 is when you do it solo on something along the lines of the Jita undock.

Murk Paradox wrote:
Again, shoot an asteroid, read the warning, and do it again. Tell me what happens.

You do not need to /facedesk to realize this, it's a simple concept. Action, reaction.

How about you fit out a cat and shoot a station instead. Then open the wreck with your looter alt. Tell me what you see.

Tell me how you "lost the ship so it's a 1" when you still have 0-8 blasters and 0-3 mag stabs in your hangar. Note how you risked these modules not once, not twice but three times - once to the loot fairy, then to other players looting them before you, then again going suspect while collecting loot.

The probability of losing the catalyst hull and rigs is 1. The rest of the ship is a risk, up to the loot fairy and good old pvp interaction.

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#520 - 2013-08-23 20:04:43 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

Success rates and profitability at suicide ganking has risk.



So suicide ganking has risks right?