These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ganking miners - What do you get from it?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#221 - 2014-06-22 15:57:40 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
I am not asking for change in EVE. I have nothing against gankers. I'm just saying some of their arguments are wrong. simple as
How is advising people to actually tank their ships wrong? It's not a 100% effective way of not exploding, nothing is short of never undocking, but it's most definitely a very effective method of minimising the risk of doing so.

quoted you but for all above.

Tanking is a good idea, Not being AFK is a good idea. Yes it lessens the chances of being ganked, but does not stop you from being ganked.

good thing that claim wasn't made, then, right?
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#222 - 2014-06-22 15:58:53 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
I am not asking for change in EVE. I have nothing against gankers. I'm just saying some of their arguments are wrong. simple as
How is advising people to actually tank their ships wrong? It's not a 100% effective way of not exploding, nothing is short of never undocking, but it's most definitely a very effective method of minimising the risk of doing so.

quoted you but for all above.

Tanking is a good idea, Not being AFK is a good idea. Yes it lessens the chances of being ganked, but does not stop you from being ganked.
And that is how it should be, there should never be a 100% effective way of not getting ganked while in space, it would break the game because the whole game, especially the economy, revolves around the fact that stuff explodes in space.


Yes that is how it should be. I agree. But to say TANK TANK TANK be at keyboard and you wont get ganked is a falsehood. I protect my miners by tank, and being alert with Dscan on mouse spam. Never been ganked while doing this, but I am lucky I suppose.
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#223 - 2014-06-22 16:02:51 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
I am not asking for change in EVE. I have nothing against gankers. I'm just saying some of their arguments are wrong. simple as
How is advising people to actually tank their ships wrong? It's not a 100% effective way of not exploding, nothing is short of never undocking, but it's most definitely a very effective method of minimising the risk of doing so.

quoted you but for all above.

Tanking is a good idea, Not being AFK is a good idea. Yes it lessens the chances of being ganked, but does not stop you from being ganked.

good thing that claim wasn't made, then, right?


yes it was.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you,
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#224 - 2014-06-22 16:03:09 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Yes that is how it should be. I agree. But to say TANK TANK TANK be at keyboard and you wont get ganked is a falsehood. I protect my miners by tank, and being alert with Dscan on mouse spam. Never been ganked while doing this, but I am lucky I suppose.


Not lucky, just proof that a bunch of stuff you previously posted was nonsense.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#225 - 2014-06-22 16:03:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
malcovas Henderson wrote:
But to say TANK TANK TANK be at keyboard and you wont get ganked is a falsehood.
It's a good job I never said that then, isn't it?

Saying if you don't want to get blown up then follow this advice is not the same as saying nobody is going to blow you up if you follow this advice. It's advice that is designed to minimise the risk of getting blown up.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#226 - 2014-06-22 16:04:54 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:

Yes that is how it should be. I agree. But to say TANK TANK TANK be at keyboard and you wont get ganked is a falsehood. I protect my miners by tank, and being alert with Dscan on mouse spam. Never been ganked while doing this, but I am lucky I suppose.


It's really not a total falsehood, though. If you are paying attention in highsec, the only point of failure in which you can die is gates. And even then, scouting solves that problem. Stations aren't a problem thanks to instas.

There really aren't a lot of ways to force a fight in this game besides chokepoints and bubbles, one of which you do not have to worry about in highsec, and the other of which can be largely mitigated.

"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.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#227 - 2014-06-22 16:04:59 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
How is advising people to actually tank their ships wrong? It's not a 100% effective way of not exploding, nothing is short of never undocking, but it's most definitely a very effective method of minimising the risk of doing so.

quoted you but for all above.

Tanking is a good idea, Not being AFK is a good idea. Yes it lessens the chances of being ganked, but does not stop you from being ganked.

good thing that claim wasn't made, then, right?


yes it was.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you,

read it again. he said

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#228 - 2014-06-22 16:11:53 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
read it again. he said

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"
Reading is hard when your prejudices are blinding you Roll

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#229 - 2014-06-22 16:21:18 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
read it again. he said

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"
Reading is hard when your prejudices are blinding you Roll


Could it, rather than prejudice, actually be something in his eye? Blink

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#230 - 2014-06-22 16:36:43 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
read it again. he said

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"
Reading is hard when your prejudices are blinding you Roll


Could it, rather than prejudice, actually be something in his eye? Blink





"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"


"Want to lessen the chances to be blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"

How you can read both the same way is beyond me.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#231 - 2014-06-22 16:40:58 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"


"Want to lessen the chances to be blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"

How you can read both the same way is beyond me.




Because we aren't being deliberately obtuse.

"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.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#232 - 2014-06-22 16:43:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
malcovas Henderson wrote:

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"


"Want to lessen the chances to be blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"

How you can read both the same way is beyond me.



Quite easily, not wanting something to happen doesn't make it not happen. Both statements say essentially the same thing, l2english.

I refer you to this post

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2014-06-22 16:46:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Benny Ohu
malcovas Henderson wrote:

"Don't want to get blown up?"
"Want to lessen the chances to be blown up?"

How you can read both the same way is beyond me.



and yet neither suggest that the advice given would certainly prevent you from blowing up.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#234 - 2014-06-22 16:54:43 UTC
Intar Medris wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Silky Cyno wrote:
Some people like real fights Vs people that shoot back, some people shoot miners.

Miners have the tools to shoot back, their drone bays aren't restricted to mining drones. Most choose not to, just as most of them choose to not fit their ships with a tank.

Choices have consequences.


5 Hobgoblin II drones aren't going to keep a Hulk from being blown to bits by even just one Gank fit Cat.


Tanking a Retriever is like putting a padlocked gate on this road.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#235 - 2014-06-22 16:55:13 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
read it again. he said

"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"
Reading is hard when your prejudices are blinding you Roll


Could it, rather than prejudice, actually be something in his eye? Blink





"Don't want to get blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"


"Want to lessen the chances to be blown up? Use a mining ship that's fit for the purpose of mining in a hostile environment, fit a tank, pay attention to the game, don't be AFK when the gankers find you"

How you can read both the same way is beyond me.




If you are struggling to understand the difference between risk mitigation and risk annulment, then it probably will be beyond you

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#236 - 2014-06-22 16:55:25 UTC
Malcovas, stopit.
These straw man arguments are getting clichéd, not to mention irritating.
You have been around long enough to know one when you see it so again,
Malcovas, stopit

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Matilda Cecilia Fock
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2014-06-22 17:02:22 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
(lengthy quote)


I think you're wrong to call it a matter of names. Some people mine because that's the only way they enjoy EVE, for whatever reasons. They are not paying/playing because of the asploding ships business. And that should be a viable option as long as it fitted to the whole EVE theme: a harsh cold universe where ugly things happen.

In some other thread, I suggested a mechanic through which people who worked a lot on PvE, could fight back PvPrs by having them chased by NPC bounty hunters, which would strike them randomly and for as long as the NPC bounty didn't run out and they were flying armed ships.

That would allow PvE players to fight back PvP players without bothering to change their way to enjoy EVE. Further, it would inspire a small amount of healthy fear into the souls of PvPrs: who did you just gank? A noob? Or someone whose main can drop on you 200 million in bounties so you'll be chased all over the universe by NPCs randomly spawning out of nowhere?

Let's say that NPC could spawn on the target once each 10 minutes, with a 5% chance to spawn. After 200 minutes, it would be a nice chance that the NPCs eventually spawned... maybe when the target was flying his mission ship, which then would be minced to bits for as few as a 15 million ISK bounty.

THAT is retribution. Such a miner would be a fearsome sight -an ox with hay on the horn, to say so. And yet, he would be PvP neutral as he can't do **** until he's bothered and earns a kill right. The grand scheme of PvP balance is respected... just now it's bit more risky to PvPrs.

To the point, some people just want to mine. It's not for everyone but it's why they pay money to CCP. And maybe CCP is right to tell them "PvP like the 20% or quit! Your way is not allowed in our precious game!" But then they should be a bit more frank about it and don't allow it to happen. Remove asteroids and mining altogether. Why the heck, remove PvE too! Don't let anyone think he can just PvE in EVE Online.

Q: Should we be worried? A: Nope. (...) Worry a lot if Fozzie, Masterplan, Rise, Veritas, Bettik, Ytterbium, Scarpia, Arrow, or even Greyscale leaves. Worry a little if Punkturis, karkur, SoniClover, Affinity, Goliath, or Xhagen leaves.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#238 - 2014-06-22 17:07:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Matilda Cecilia Fock wrote:
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
(lengthy quote)


I think you're wrong to call it a matter of names. Some people mine because that's the only way they enjoy EVE, for whatever reasons. They are not paying/playing because of the asploding ships business. And that should be a viable option as long as it fitted to the whole EVE theme: a harsh cold universe where ugly things happen.

In some other thread, I suggested a mechanic through which people who worked a lot on PvE, could fight back PvPrs by having them chased by NPC bounty hunters, which would strike them randomly and for as long as the NPC bounty didn't run out and they were flying armed ships.

That would allow PvE players to fight back PvP players without bothering to change their way to enjoy EVE. Further, it would inspire a small amount of healthy fear into the souls of PvPrs: who did you just gank? A noob? Or someone whose main can drop on you 200 million in bounties so you'll be chased all over the universe by NPCs randomly spawning out of nowhere?

Let's say that NPC could spawn on the target once each 10 minutes, with a 5% chance to spawn. After 200 minutes, it would be a nice chance that the NPCs eventually spawned... maybe when the target was flying his mission ship, which then would be minced to bits for as few as a 15 million ISK bounty.

THAT is retribution. Such a miner would be a fearsome sight -an ox with hay on the horn, to say so. And yet, he would be PvP neutral as he can't do **** until he's bothered and earns a kill right. The grand scheme of PvP balance is respected... just now it's bit more risky to PvPrs.

To the point, some people just want to mine. It's not for everyone but it's why they pay money to CCP. And maybe CCP is right to tell them "PvP like the 20% or quit! Your way is not allowed in our precious game!" But then they should be a bit more frank about it and don't allow it to happen. Remove asteroids and mining altogether. Why the heck, remove PvE too! Don't let anyone think he can just PvE in EVE Online.
Faction Navy NPCs already chase gankers in highsec whenever they're undocked Roll Your idea adds nothing of value for anybody, it's just a cry for CCP to hold your hand.

Gankers would adapt to it, as they have done every time CCP have nerfed them, and miners would keep demanding more changes because they'd still be dying due to their laziness.

Be careful what you wish for, if CCP are holding your hand, it's to steal your watch.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#239 - 2014-06-22 17:07:59 UTC
Matilda Cecilia Fock wrote:

That would allow PvE players to fight back PvP players without bothering to change their way to enjoy EVE.


And that is why it is unacceptable.

And if you can't see that, you are beyond redemption. So I'll just say: Do your own dirty work, stop expecting the NPCs to do it for you. Your entire attitude needs a 180.

"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.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#240 - 2014-06-22 17:08:11 UTC
Matilda Cecilia Fock wrote:
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
(lengthy quote)


I think you're wrong to call it a matter of names. Some people mine because that's the only way they enjoy EVE, for whatever reasons. They are not paying/playing because of the asploding ships business. And that should be a viable option as long as it fitted to the whole EVE theme: a harsh cold universe where ugly things happen.

In some other thread, I suggested a mechanic through which people who worked a lot on PvE, could fight back PvPrs by having them chased by NPC bounty hunters, which would strike them randomly and for as long as the NPC bounty didn't run out and they were flying armed ships.

That would allow PvE players to fight back PvP players without bothering to change their way to enjoy EVE. Further, it would inspire a small amount of healthy fear into the souls of PvPrs: who did you just gank? A noob? Or someone whose main can drop on you 200 million in bounties so you'll be chased all over the universe by NPCs randomly spawning out of nowhere?

Let's say that NPC could spawn on the target once each 10 minutes, with a 5% chance to spawn. After 200 minutes, it would be a nice chance that the NPCs eventually spawned... maybe when the target was flying his mission ship, which then would be minced to bits for as few as a 15 million ISK bounty.

THAT is retribution. Such a miner would be a fearsome sight -an ox with hay on the horn, to say so. And yet, he would be PvP neutral as he can't do **** until he's bothered and earns a kill right. The grand scheme of PvP balance is respected... just now it's bit more risky to PvPrs.

To the point, some people just want to mine. It's not for everyone but it's why they pay money to CCP. And maybe CCP is right to tell them "PvP like the 20% or quit! Your way is not allowed in our precious game!" But then they should be a bit more frank about it and don't allow it to happen. Remove asteroids and mining altogether. Why the heck, remove PvE too! Don't let anyone think he can just PvE in EVE Online.


The game needs miners though.


If CCP did away with asteroids and mining, the only way to get materials for construction would be NPC sell orders.
That would destabilise the 'player driven' aspect of the market drastically, and would therefore be a very bad thing.