These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.

First post First post First post
Author
Solecist Project
#621 - 2014-06-19 23:41:42 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
You have to put this into a proper perspective.


What do you expect CCP to do? Nothing?

It doesn't work that way and you know that.


It's interesting because CCP has given miners & such more & more options over the years & to this day they still do not utilise them.
Yeah I know that and I'm completely on your side with this.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:

What do you expect CCP to do? Nothing?


Yes.

They need to ignore the voices of the people who are crying about needing more ways to defend themselves because they explicitly refuse to use the ones that they already have.

That kind of behavior not only should not be catered to, but it should be actively persecuted.


You need to apply the proper perspective.


CCP has no choice than to do something. First of all, because change is always necessary.
Second, because change simply is always necessary and third,
because they can't just leave a situation the way it is.

It's simply bad business.


What they have done for years though,
is give the whiners something that shuts them up,
while often actually also introducing negative side effects.

Like can flipping. *snickers* xD


The lowslot changes aren't bad at all. They're useless, yes, but everybody knows that,
except the haters who keep crying. They, once again, are shut up,
until the next generation emerges.


The important part is to make sure that no matter what change is coming,
people always remember and know that "just one little tweak" is what we had enough of already.


Permakilling freighters simply will lead to them being changed. That's just how the game works.
That's how CCP works. It's a necessity. Same with the mining ships.

These aren't game breaking changes and they don't "raise security a bit",
because people are - as mentioned above - daft as **** anyway.


CCP knows that. Believe me. (:

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#622 - 2014-06-19 23:47:37 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Didn't freighters get some lowslots recently that gives them the ability to field a pretty nasty tank? I also recall some mining barges getting some combat buffs.
The thing about the new found tankability of freighters is the existence of people who just don't care about things like cargo value, EHP or the ratio of the 2.

When triple bulkhead freighters die practically empty it makes it a rather moot point to bring up the ability to fit bulkheads. You've already proved it's useless when someone wants your freighter dead, regardless of the reason.


Maybe they shouldn't have complained about rigs being a ****** choice, considering the significant part of the tank is now in the armour or shield. It takes something like 80 T1 catalysts to kill a triple bulkhead freighter. 80 people. Is it asking too much for the freighter pilot to maybe make some friends in the popular single player themepark game EVE Online?
Rigs V mods isn't the issue either. The issue is being in Aufay because it's not terribly feasible to counter 80+ people trying to kill you in a ship the leaves them plenty of time to do it due to mobility limitations. The more I think about it, running the blockade or countering it seem like bad ideas compared to bypassing it.

But really what more would rigs have done? Would CODE not have set up it's blockade? Would the GSF/friends not be lending support? I doubt either of those would have played out terribly differently.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#623 - 2014-06-19 23:48:03 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Didn't freighters get some lowslots recently that gives them the ability to field a pretty nasty tank? I also recall some mining barges getting some combat buffs.
The thing about the new found tankability of freighters is the existence of people who just don't care about things like cargo value, EHP or the ratio of the 2.

When triple bulkhead freighters die practically empty it makes it a rather moot point to bring up the ability to fit bulkheads. You've already proved it's useless when someone wants your freighter dead, regardless of the reason.


"Freighter", singular.

Only one of the ones destroyed in the Aufay event had a proper tank fitted.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
#624 - 2014-06-19 23:49:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Ramona McCandless
Solecist Project wrote:

It's simply bad business.


Hudson may be right

If CCP have figures that match what those who dont want to play the game but just let it play itself say, then money talks and some of us will start looking for another game where there is no god and you are allowed to choose your own adventure and proves a proper free MMORPG experience.

Of course, if they are wrong, we stay, they move on to Farmville or Animal Crossing or GenericFantasyLevelUp Simulator and we dont have to listen the the annoying drone of people how cannot formulate plans or wish to take any action at all.

But people being people, someone will always find someway to claim the game is unbalanced against them.
Money talks after all


I wonder who will want to buy ships when highsec is crawling with Isboxing mining fleets.

At least the NUlliances will have a target rich environment when the invasions begin.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#625 - 2014-06-19 23:49:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Didn't freighters get some lowslots recently that gives them the ability to field a pretty nasty tank? I also recall some mining barges getting some combat buffs.
The thing about the new found tankability of freighters is the existence of people who just don't care about things like cargo value, EHP or the ratio of the 2.

When triple bulkhead freighters die practically empty it makes it a rather moot point to bring up the ability to fit bulkheads. You've already proved it's useless when someone wants your freighter dead, regardless of the reason.


"Freighter", singular.

Only one of the ones destroyed in the Aufay event had a proper tank fitted.

I saw 3 looking at the killboards, assuming that definition means 3 bulkheads. Also the number doesn't matter since the point was made at the first one.

Lets also not forget that common hauling wisdom prior to this was simply don't haul more than 2x your gank cost.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#626 - 2014-06-19 23:50:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
But really what more would rigs have done? Would CODE not have set up it's blockade? Would the GSF/friends not be lending support? I doubt either of those would have played out terribly differently.


A good tank opens up other options (Hint: You don't even need to tank it), such as utilising the power of friendship in this single player themepark spaceship game.

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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#627 - 2014-06-19 23:55:12 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Lets also not forget that common hauling wisdom prior to this was simply don't haul more than 2x your gank cost.


It was the standard. Past tense. It was the standard until the freighter pilots' whimpering cries reached critical mass to have the devs give them the ability to fit a tank like they claimed they wanted.

Now, we have a point to make.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#628 - 2014-06-19 23:59:56 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
But really what more would rigs have done? Would CODE not have set up it's blockade? Would the GSF/friends not be lending support? I doubt either of those would have played out terribly differently.


A good tank options up other options, such as utilising the power of friendship in this single player themepark spaceship game.
Ok, that's a non-sequitur at this point since the method of fitting and the number of players involved in hauling have no relation. But if we're going down this path anyways, are your own haulers setting an example by running with 10+ support through highsec to counter potential 80 man gank squads?

Most importantly, why is it so bad to do the smart thing, not tie up a dozen pilots and simply bypass the blockade? Cause it only requires one character? Why should we waste effort?
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#629 - 2014-06-20 00:02:09 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
But really what more would rigs have done? Would CODE not have set up it's blockade? Would the GSF/friends not be lending support? I doubt either of those would have played out terribly differently.


A good tank options up other options, such as utilising the power of friendship in this single player themepark spaceship game.
Ok, that's a non-sequitur at this point since the method of fitting and the number of players involved in hauling have no relation. But if we're going down this path anyways, are your own haulers setting an example by running with 10+ support through highsec to counter potential 80 man gank squads?

Most importantly, why is it so bad to do the smart thing, not tie up a dozen pilots and simply bypass the blockade? Cause it only requires one character? Why should we waste effort?


No they run with 1 other guy who webs them in to a 2 second align time like all of the other high-value haulers that don't get ganked.

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.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#630 - 2014-06-20 00:18:12 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Lets also not forget that common hauling wisdom prior to this was simply don't haul more than 2x your gank cost.


It was the standard. Past tense. It was the standard until the freighter pilots' whimpering cries reached critical mass to have the devs give them the ability to fit a tank like they claimed they wanted.

Now, we have a point to make.
I'm not sure what the point they are trying to make is. It's not fit a tank, because those with tanks, both partial and full are being killed. It's not haul reasonable loads because empty freighters are being killed.

I can only guess it's "because we can" for the most part. That said, it wasn't just a matter of adding tank. Not on the part of the request or CCP's response.

Regarding what wisdom was vs is, I doubt there has really been any change save stay out of Aufay. There won't be until 1) bulkheads are proven to be worth fitting for all cargo values by actually useful as a deterrent (not the case in Aufay), and 2) ganking of non-bulkhead fit freighters for that reason and no other becomes significantly more widespread.
Solecist Project
#631 - 2014-06-20 00:19:39 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Lets also not forget that common hauling wisdom prior to this was simply don't haul more than 2x your gank cost.


It was the standard. Past tense. It was the standard until the freighter pilots' whimpering cries reached critical mass to have the devs give them the ability to fit a tank like they claimed they wanted.

Now, we have a point to make.
I'm not sure what the point they are trying to make is. It's not fit a tank, because those with tanks, both partial and full are being killed. It's not haul reasonable loads because empty freighters are being killed.

I can only guess it's "because we can" for the most part. That said, it wasn't just a matter of adding tank. Not on the part of the request or CCP's response.

Regarding what wisdom was vs is, I doubt there has really been any change save stay out of Aufay. There won't be until 1) bulkheads are proven to be worth fitting for all cargo values by actually useful as a deterrent (not the case in Aufay), and 2) ganking of non-bulkhead fit freighters for that reason and no other becomes significantly more widespread.

The freighters are getting ganked mostly for economic reasons.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

Please note that lots of people think it does, including gankers of course.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#632 - 2014-06-20 00:26:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Mallak Azaria wrote:
No they run with 1 other guy who webs them in to a 2 second align time like all of the other high-value haulers that don't get ganked.
As a non freighter pilot I would have thought immediately webbing the ship would have lowered it's agility as well as it's speed making a true 2 second align not quite possible. Or is it that it only needs to alight for 2 sec before the web can effectively sling it into warp?

Genuine question.

Edit: And youtube has demonstrated the error of my thinking on that front. Interesting.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#633 - 2014-06-20 00:41:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
No they run with 1 other guy who webs them in to a 2 second align time like all of the other high-value haulers that don't get ganked.
As a non freighter pilot I would have thought immediately webbing the ship would have lowered it's agility as well as it's speed making a true 2 second align not quite possible. Or is it that it only needs to alight for 2 sec before the web can effectively sling it into warp?

Genuine question.


Pretty much. With effective webber placement getting the webs to land in time is a trivial issue & a freighter moving in such a way is essentially impossible to bump intentionally.

Here is a nice demonstration & note that freighter gankers have been telling people about this for years. It takes 2 accounts or 1 friend to pull off.

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.

Voyager Arran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#634 - 2014-06-20 01:05:54 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
No they run with 1 other guy who webs them in to a 2 second align time like all of the other high-value haulers that don't get ganked.
As a non freighter pilot I would have thought immediately webbing the ship would have lowered it's agility as well as it's speed making a true 2 second align not quite possible. Or is it that it only needs to alight for 2 sec before the web can effectively sling it into warp?

Genuine question.

Edit: And youtube has demonstrated the error of my thinking on that front. Interesting.


It's a fun little quirk of mechanics. Being webbed reduces your maximum speed instantaneously and your current speed gradually (assuming you were over your new limit). This means that at the moment a Freighter with any momentum is hit by something like, say, a cheaply fit triple-web Slasher, it is suddenly going well above its new maximum speed and will immediately take off into warp.

The Freighter also needs to be aligned in its direction of warp, but a ship jumping through a gate has no preexisting velocity vector to override.


This is also why you don't web things trying to warp out before someone has pointed them.
Goddess Purelight
Technocratic Cult of Goddess Purelight
#635 - 2014-06-20 03:02:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Goddess Purelight
I didn't read all the posts forgive me...

1. Why not use the Frogs to move stuff. (They do great work, so you don't have to)
2. Why not use a scout to make sure your not going to get ganked
3. Why not just pay the code (that might not have helped in this case but still) its chump change
Ya I know my my writing skills suck.

Ok last thing,

In real life you can get ganked anywhere u go, why not in eve?

Forgive my sucky writing skills will read the rest of posts in bed to nite and may edit this

(TL:DR In real life you can get ganked anywhere u go, why not in eve?)
Jethro Winchester
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#636 - 2014-06-20 05:52:02 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD BH Supogo
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks and subverting the language filter. ISD Supogo

That being said there is absolutely nothing wrong with what he or the rest of CODE does in HS. Ganking is nothing new and HS was never intended to be 100% safe. Aside from the occasional case of bad luck if you're ganked in HS it's your own fault. Use a scout, pay attention to your potentially multi-billion isk ship, and stop asking CCP to idiot-proof the game for you.
Azov Rassau
The Hornets Cartel
#637 - 2014-06-20 07:43:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Azov Rassau
Goddess Purelight wrote:
Why not use the Frogs to move stuff. (They do great work, so you don't have to)

This.

They Are organized. They really are, and their techniques are exemplary, contrary to the AFK freighter pilots stupidity who don't remain at keyboard, fail to scout the route and then ask CCP to fix their safety.

Goddess Purelight wrote:
In real life you can get ganked anywhere u go, why not in eve?

Correct.

I don't always compare RL and EVE, but real freighters navigating near the coast of Somalia often bring armed guards (like this huge containership at this moment) are constantly in contact with NATO's navy forces while keeping an eye on their surroundings, using binoculars and RADAR at ALL times. In other words, they care about their safety, their assets and ship.

Considering Aufay is in fact very similar to that dangerous coast at the moment, why EVE should be any different? Plus, it's in space, supposed to be a lot more dangerous than sea.

Also, this thread Shocked

Be the change you want to see in Highsec.

Anti-Ganking Fun: www.gankerjamming.com

Dave Stark
#638 - 2014-06-20 08:42:24 UTC
if you're splitting the loot with your scanner and bumper (which, if you're not, you should feel bad because you're a horrible person) then they're not an accomplice, they were simply your customer since you paid them to provide a service.
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
Transgress
#639 - 2014-06-20 08:50:52 UTC
Momentarily distracted by a juvenile skunk wandering the fenceline at work. Kept wondering if the great horned owl on top of the lightpost was going to gank it or not. In this case the owl chose wisely.

EVE is a dark place, and bad things happen to people who don't exercise reasonable caution in what they do, be it market trading, scams, exploring, mining, mission running or hauling. While I would never stoop to victim-blaming in RL, as I consider it despicable, in EVE you do have to shoulder the burden of the consequences of your own inactions. Failing to take measures to help ensure your own safety such as maintaining situational awareness, properly equipping for a task, and using teamwork results in bad things happening.

When Bad Things happen, more often than not they could have been prevented. You can try to blame the ones who did the Bad Thing, but in reality you carry the lion's share of the blame. This isn't like other MMO's where the bad guys are generally ineffective and usually comically absurd. Here they are out to do your space pixels real harm, and if you don't do anything to prevent it they will do just that.

Expecting CCP or CONCORD to help protect you from yourself is unreasonable, and unfair to those who do take the time and effort to ensure their own safety.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#640 - 2014-06-20 09:16:52 UTC
tl;dr.

the answer is no. if freighters are being destroyed, tht means people need to buy a new one.

it keeps the freighters flowing through the market, and thus prevents them from being stuck there forever.