These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#921 - 2011-11-16 19:18:13 UTC
Helicity Boson wrote:
Short answer, no.

http://www.machine9.net/blog/?p=663

We have Goonsurance now, it's better than insurance.


woot

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Raven Ether
Doomheim
#922 - 2011-11-16 19:27:48 UTC
Helicity Boson wrote:
Short answer, no.

http://www.machine9.net/blog/?p=663

We have Goonsurance now, it's better than insurance.



Our hero is back!
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#923 - 2011-11-16 19:34:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Jack Dant wrote:
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.


Your only comparing 2 ships you can suicide gank in. Whats the math on other ships like the brutix?

Jack Dant wrote:
Cearain wrote:
[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



It takes a long time and then you have a good chance of having your payday blow up = not very profitable.

Your claim that it has potential to be hugely profitable is only looking at that one in 100,000 gank. Over time its not very profitable.

Ultimately the problem with this change is it goes in the wrong direction. High sec trade hubs need more diversity not less. In order to get this high sec travel needs to be more dangerous not less.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
#924 - 2011-11-16 23:56:47 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:
The game will improve on a scale CCP has not seen in years!

I bet it would.

So, who's going to buy new ships and modules when they stop getting exploded?

what happened in Eve so ships will not blow anymore?

rats forgot how to shoot to mission runner?
low-sec is no more present?
0.0 sov space became CONCORD controlled so no more alliances and blob-wars?
NPC 0.0 space is magically disapepared?

/me shocked

and

Nerodon wrote:
This is only because you assume that high-sec ganks account for the majority of ships being destroyed in Eve.
I believe the impact would be negligible even if all ganks were to cease from one day to another, and they most likely won't.

All this complaining about the market impact is either simply overly pessimistic, or unfounded and used as a sorry excuse to argument against the fact that this change is happening.

We can check this by opening the map, clicking on the "star map" tab, and then selecting the "Ships destroyed in the last hour" option under the "Statistics" menu. And please don't tell me that most of those ships were lost to NPC rats in missions. I've sat in enough carebear corporations to know this rarely happens.

Granted, the mineral values of null-sec losses probably exceed those of empire, what with the capitals and supercapitals and all. But carebears don't exactly produce those either.

It's fairly safe to say that most ship destruction does indeed happen in high-sec. Sure, we can remove high-sec pvp, and at the end of the day there's still null, with its in-house cap and supercap production, and low-sec (lol?). Removing high-sec pvp will still get rid of the majority of ship losses in the game. People in null have RMT farms to run, so ship losses aren't in their best interests unless as a last resort for the defense of space. People in low are too few to make any significant impact. People in high rarely lose ships to NPCs.

What do you think will happen if the demand for stuff suddenly drops, while the supply increases? I really doubt a change like that would represent just a slight shift on the curve.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Adrenalinemax
Lap Dancers
Brothers of Tangra
#925 - 2011-11-22 14:16:30 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We took the insurance out because having it was silly. It's like a double reward when you gank someone, you get their cargo and insurance. It won't stop suicide ganking, it just fixes something we haven't really felt made sense for a long time.



What about when people self destruct and time it for an alpha or two before CONCORD arrives? Is there a way to prevent payout for that?



Cause when you hit Self destruct, your can't activate guns, so your alpha will be Zero