These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Suicide Ganking: coming to an end?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#881 - 2011-11-10 12:43:59 UTC
Jojo Jackson wrote:
Which one except not to undock?
Tank your ship. Warp out. Use scouts. Get friends. Use intel.
Quote:
Where is the anti-tool which provides BALANCE?

Passive targeters ↔ High agility, cloak
Cargo Scanner ↔ Orca, Cloak
Volley of Meal (soon BC3) ↔ tank (because, yes, pretty much all the miners and haulers can be made secure against a Mael volley)
Quote:
Broken??
No.
Tanya Powers wrote:
You have the same fake argument every single jerk has and this single one doesn't really makes you very popular by normal people. So you think you're a victim from some kind of injustice...

This single argument right mere makes me puke irl...
Good news: EVE is not real life.

The simple (virtual) reality of EVE is that you are not safe. By very design of the game, and by necessity of the way the world dynamics are set up, you are never safe. If you want to be safe, you have to either not log in or create your own safety. If you choose not to do either of those, then it is a failure on your part that has created the unsafe situation that the other party can exploit to their benefit.

When I say that victims should stop being such victims, this is exactly what I mean: they need to realise that there are indeed things they can do to drastically reduce the chances of something bad happening to them, rather than to give up, throw up their arms, and proclaim that “onoz, I was a hapless victim!”. They were in fact highly complicit in creating the situation that led to their undoing, and there are indeed things they can do to avoid doing that.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#882 - 2011-11-10 13:51:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Cearain wrote:

Anybody know why they did this? It seems everytime someone suggested this on the forums they received an overwhelmingly negative response.


The removal of insurance for ships lost to CONCORD?

The simplest explanation lies at the feet of those new glass cannon, tier 3, battlecruisers that are being introduced. Which will be able to alpha like a battleship, while costing a good bit less. It probably would have resulted in freighters getting ganked for carrying as little as 500-700M ISK worth of goods (instead of the customary 1B ISK number).

Remove of insurance paid out to CONCORD losses restores that balance (mostly... everyone will have to run math once the stats get finalized).



The new BCs are new ship hulls that should be fully insured just like the battleship hull. There may be some minor decrease in the cost of the platinum insurance but not much. You would still need to buy the large guns and any mods you put on the ship.

Now how much will one of those haulers have to be carrying before they risk getting blown up? 3 billion? How much more boring can high sec transport get??

BTW I have never suicide ganked anyone I do move stuff in high sec for trade though. It seems to me that all the thought I put into how I will tank my ships and move stuff through high sec was wasted time because suicide ganking just got effectively eliminated.

Edit all the markets will be completely homogenous now because there will no longer any risk in transporting through high sec. Now people who don't think when they transport will do just as well as those who do. I hope CCP reconsiders dumbing this game down even further.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#883 - 2011-11-10 14:06:25 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Changes that make hi-sec safer without decreasing its rewards undermine the risk-vs-reward dichotomy of EvE. ...



It does undermine the rewards of traders/haulers in high sec. Now suicide ganking will be so rare that the complete idiots will be able to do just as well at it as people who used to consider the possibility of a suicide gank. Its not like it took allot of thought to tank a transport ship but now even that tiny bit of thought is no longer required.

Now all the markets will be even more homogenous and it will be even harder to find a decent way to make money hauling stuff.

So the only people who get a buff here are the dumb who don't know any better than always putting cargo expanders on and never think to put any tank on their ship or make a couple of trips. Every time you give a buff to the dumb you make the game less interesting for those who like to some complexity and challenge.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Lexmana
#884 - 2011-11-10 14:11:35 UTC
Cearain wrote:
The new BCs are new ship hulls that should be fully insured just like the battleship hull. There may be some minor decrease in the cost of the platinum insurance but not much. You would still need to buy the large guns and any mods you put on the ship.

/../ suicide ganking just got effectively eliminated..


If you are going to suicide your BC you don't insure it and it will prob only be marginally more expensive to replace an uninsured BC than a BS with insurance. No big change.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#885 - 2011-11-10 14:16:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Michael Holmes Holmes wrote:
... I have said it in this thread before and I will say it again, When you commit a INGAME CRIME and then get blown up by the INGAME POLICE you probably will not get rewarded by your INGAME insurance company. This is not about comparing real life insurance to EVE, this is about a obvious flaw in the mechanics of the game that was fixed after being exploited for far to long, so long in fact that everyone seems to think that it was the original intent, the dev team has spoken about this on this very thread and left nothing to the imagination.


What are you talking about the insurance says you will get repaid if your ship is destroyed for any reason. There is no exploit. This is the mechanics working as intended. It is intended that stupidity in eve has a price. If you do nothing but put cargo expanders on your hauler and fill it with very valuable things expect to pay a price.

You are right to avoid the comparision to real life because no real life insurance company would ever exist in a form anything close to the one that exists in the eve universe. Its an isk faucet and it will continue to be an isk faucet after this change. No real business works that way.

Go ahead into state farm and tell them you are going to equip your car with rocket launchers and go driving around with other people who you are at war with and have their cars similarly equipped. See if they will give you insurance. Is that exploit too? Should people who are in war decs not get insurance? Should people who go gcc and lose their ship not get insurance?

Because there is no real life comparision to insurance, people who want these different things are just giving their own opinions. The only right answer is the answer that makes the game more fun. If you think the game is more fun when dumb people do just as well as those who think a bit then you will like this change.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#886 - 2011-11-10 14:24:00 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
Cearain wrote:
The new BCs are new ship hulls that should be fully insured just like the battleship hull. There may be some minor decrease in the cost of the platinum insurance but not much. You would still need to buy the large guns and any mods you put on the ship.

/../ suicide ganking just got effectively eliminated..


If you are going to suicide your BC you don't insure it and it will prob only be marginally more expensive to replace an uninsured BC than a BS with insurance. No big change.



I think you may be assuming a tier 3 bc will cost the same as a tier 2 bc. I imagine the price difference will be similar to the price difference between tier 1 bcs and tier 2 bcs.

When you look at the total cost for the 10-15 or so it would take to blow up a freighter it is a substantial nerf to something that needed a buff not a nerf.

If suicide ganking was so profitable more people would be doing it. As it is its pretty much only those who want to grief - because the potential for profit is much less than other methods in game.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#887 - 2011-11-10 14:24:38 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Changes that make hi-sec safer without decreasing its rewards undermine the risk-vs-reward dichotomy of EvE. ...



It does undermine the rewards of traders/haulers in high sec. Now suicide ganking will be so rare that the complete idiots will be able to do just as well at it as people who used to consider the possibility of a suicide gank. Its not like it took allot of thought to tank a transport ship but now even that tiny bit of thought is no longer required.

Now all the markets will be even more homogenous and it will be even harder to find a decent way to make money hauling stuff.

So the only people who get a buff here are the dumb who don't know any better than always putting cargo expanders on and never think to put any tank on their ship or make a couple of trips. Every time you give a buff to the dumb you make the game less interesting for those who like to some complexity and challenge.

Dude, seriously:

THIS CHANGE WILL NOT STOP OR IN ANY SIGNIFICANT WAY REDUCE SUICIDE GANKS.

There really is no need for this drama.

In your example above, this insurance change is a NON-ISSUE for suicide-ganks-for-profit. So you should still be able to haul stuff for decent isk.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Ned Black
Driders
#888 - 2011-11-10 14:26:49 UTC
Good change... now change it so that you dont get any insurance if you self destruct either...
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#889 - 2011-11-10 14:37:50 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I think you may be assuming a tier 3 bc will cost the same as a tier 2 bc. I imagine the price difference will be similar to the price difference between tier 1 bcs and tier 2 bcs.

A Tornado will cost a bit over 40 mil according to the Sisi bpos. A tempest/apoc costs around 35 mil after insurance. Not really a significant increase, and the volley/dps will be the same.

Quote:
If suicide ganking was so profitable more people would be doing it. As it is its pretty much only those who want to grief - because the potential for profit is much less than other methods in game.

In my experience, suicide ganking haulers is boring. Profit potential is huge, but in practice, you end up scanning ships for two hours before you find a reasonable target. And then the loot fairies do their thing and only 10% of the isk value drops Shocked

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#890 - 2011-11-10 15:02:26 UTC
So, let me get this straight.

Because the effective cost of a suicide gank has increased from about 30M per suicide ship to more like 90M per suicide ship, suddenly EVE is happy fluffy bunny sunshine land and the whining carebears have won?

Looks like suicide ganking will still be viable, you just need to hit more juicy targets in order for it to be profitable. Sounds fair to me.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Eternus8lux8lucis
Guardians of the Gate
RAZOR Alliance
#891 - 2011-11-10 15:09:48 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
So, let me get this straight.

Because the effective cost of a suicide gank has increased from about 30M per suicide ship to more like 90M per suicide ship, suddenly EVE is happy fluffy bunny sunshine land and the whining carebears have won?

Looks like suicide ganking will still be viable, you just need to hit more juicy targets in order for it to be profitable. Sounds fair to me.



No not really to 90mil, it will if you continue to use a BS when you can just use the new Tier 3 BC instead which will decrease the costs to about 40-50mil a pop including fittings.Twisted

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#892 - 2011-11-10 15:14:34 UTC
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
No not really to 90mil, it will if you continue to use a BS when you can just use the new Tier 3 BC instead which will decrease the costs to about 40-50mil a pop including fittings.Twisted


In other words, things have barely changed at all, then? This whole thread is 45 pages of tears and drama over absolutely nothing?

Business as usual in the EVE community then Lol

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#893 - 2011-11-10 15:14:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jojo Jackson wrote:
Which one except not to undock?
Tank your ship. Warp out. Use scouts. Get friends. Use intel.
Quote:
Where is the anti-tool which provides BALANCE?

Passive targeters ↔ High agility, cloak
Cargo Scanner ↔ Orca, Cloak

it's getting boring....
have you ever heard about frighters? You know it: big ship with 1mil m3 cargohold? "Obelisk" or something like it. You know: it's a very funny ships - they have no slots to put cloak and they have VERY BAD agility Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#894 - 2011-11-10 15:16:08 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Changes that make hi-sec safer without decreasing its rewards undermine the risk-vs-reward dichotomy of EvE. ...



It does undermine the rewards of traders/haulers in high sec. Now suicide ganking will be so rare that the complete idiots will be able to do just as well at it as people who used to consider the possibility of a suicide gank. Its not like it took allot of thought to tank a transport ship but now even that tiny bit of thought is no longer required.

Now all the markets will be even more homogenous and it will be even harder to find a decent way to make money hauling stuff.

So the only people who get a buff here are the dumb who don't know any better than always putting cargo expanders on and never think to put any tank on their ship or make a couple of trips. Every time you give a buff to the dumb you make the game less interesting for those who like to some complexity and challenge.

Dude, seriously:

THIS CHANGE WILL NOT STOP OR IN ANY SIGNIFICANT WAY REDUCE SUICIDE GANKS.

There really is no need for this drama.

In your example above, this insurance change is a NON-ISSUE for suicide-ganks-for-profit. So you should still be able to haul stuff for decent isk.


What he said.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821
Eternus8lux8lucis
Guardians of the Gate
RAZOR Alliance
#895 - 2011-11-10 15:19:44 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
No not really to 90mil, it will if you continue to use a BS when you can just use the new Tier 3 BC instead which will decrease the costs to about 40-50mil a pop including fittings.Twisted


In other words, things have barely changed at all, then? This whole thread is 45 pages of tears and drama over absolutely nothing?

Business as usual in the EVE community then Lol



Why you think Ive stuck with this thread so long? Its been great fun watching and listening and posting. Especially Tippia going after everyone.Twisted

Serious gankers change ship class, its easier and faster to train for them as well, added perks to the BC hull size, no real downside. Nothing changes for those flying cruiser class or for destroyers.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#896 - 2011-11-10 15:19:53 UTC
March rabbit wrote:

have you ever heard about frighters? You know it: big ship with 1mil m3 cargohold? "Obelisk" or something like it. You know: it's a very funny ships - they have no slots to put cloak and they have VERY BAD agility Lol

Then use scouts or avoid carrying so much stuff you are worth ganking..

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#897 - 2011-11-10 15:29:17 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
it's getting boring....
I know, but if people actually started to listen to the ample useful advice that is being provided, it wouldn't have to be repeated as often.
Quote:
have you ever heard about frighters?
You mean that ship that can withstand a Mael volley just fine? Yes I have. It's not what he's talking about.

By the way, have you heard about measuring the value of your cargo? About using scouts? About using a support fleet for your capship? About, through highly mysterious and untraceable means gaining undetectable bonus EHP that completely throws off the damage calculations of the attacker…?
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#898 - 2011-11-10 15:41:10 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
This whole thread is 45 pages of tears and drama over absolutely nothing?


Yep, pretty much.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#899 - 2011-11-10 17:00:49 UTC  |  Edited by: March rabbit
Tippia wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
it's getting boring....
I know, but if people actually started to listen to the ample useful advice that is being provided, it wouldn't have to be repeated as often.

QFT. that's why i repeat again and again.....

Tippia wrote:
Quote:
have you ever heard about frighters?
You mean that ship that can withstand a Mael volley just fine? Yes I have. It's not what he's talking about.

By the way, have you heard about measuring the value of your cargo? About using scouts? About using a support fleet for your capship? About, through highly mysterious and untraceable means gaining undetectable bonus EHP that completely throws off the damage calculations of the attacker…?

[troll]yea. but is there any freighter which can survive after DD from titan then? [/troll]

and i repeat again (maybe you finally will understand something):
Tippia wrote:

Passive targeters ↔ High agility, cloak
Cargo Scanner ↔ Orca, Cloak

is there any protection from it for freighters?

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#900 - 2011-11-10 17:32:31 UTC
March rabbit wrote:

is there any protection from it for freighters?

Sure, but it will cost you… and anyway, that wasn't the question, so you can stop moving the goal posts.