These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

pushing for harder punishment on hi sec gankers

First post
Author
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#501 - 2014-09-24 11:26:51 UTC
Thomas Mayaki wrote:

Also you also seem to fail to recognise that ganking is totally risk adverse as you know exactly how much each gank will cost (or if you get your ships reimbursed it should cost 0isk).


Also, you seem to fail to comprehend what "averse" means.

By definition, "risk averse" does not apply to ganking.

"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
#502 - 2014-09-24 11:37:32 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Thomas Mayaki wrote:

Also you also seem to fail to recognise that ganking is totally risk adverse as you know exactly how much each gank will cost (or if you get your ships reimbursed it should cost 0isk).


Also, you seem to fail to comprehend what "averse" means.

By definition, "risk averse" does not apply to ganking.
Is someone confusing risk management with risk aversion again?

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#503 - 2014-09-24 11:54:53 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Thomas Mayaki wrote:

Also you also seem to fail to recognise that ganking is totally risk adverse as you know exactly how much each gank will cost (or if you get your ships reimbursed it should cost 0isk).


Also, you seem to fail to comprehend what "averse" means.

By definition, "risk averse" does not apply to ganking.
Is someone confusing risk management with risk aversion again?


Looks that way. Idk what it is lately, no matter what forum I am on I am having to break things down Barney style, because people have suddenly forgotten basic definitions.

I think Lizard Squad DDoS'ed dictionary.com, or something.

"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.

Dirk Decibel
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#504 - 2014-09-24 12:04:08 UTC
Thomas Mayaki wrote:


You seem to be saying the counter to a ganker is sitting in a Moa all day waiting for ganker to be stupid enough to gank in range of your Moa. Not that I am saying that gankers aren't stupid but to me waiting around all day for a 20sec engagement with a ganker doesn't sound like 'fun'.

Let me tell you this, scouting multiple solar systems, having to covertly scan the potential targets fitting, work out how much dps you need for the target, making bookmarks or having an alt provide a warp in, undocking in your gankalyst and landing on grid just 5 seconds after your target warped off and decided to do something different or was alarmed by your or your alt's presence is not 'fun' either. It is however what you have to deal with being a ganker.

Gankers have to put in time and effort to get their targets, as do most people who are looking for whatever form of PvP. I see no reason why White Knights should be exempt from this.

Ganks are also not foolproof, if you have your DPS/tank numbers off, you could easily fail. Even if you do have them right, you can be warping right into a trap or be caught by someone passing by who is looking for easy kills (the latter happens WAY more often than actual traps). Or my favorite: land on top of your target, go to work just to have a belt rat warp in and jam you when you have him in structure. The ironic part being that that has happened to me more often than being stopped by White Knights.
CyberRaver
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#505 - 2014-09-24 12:10:30 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#506 - 2014-09-24 12:44:04 UTC
Dirk Decibel wrote:
Thomas Mayaki wrote:


You seem to be saying the counter to a ganker is sitting in a Moa all day waiting for ganker to be stupid enough to gank in range of your Moa. Not that I am saying that gankers aren't stupid but to me waiting around all day for a 20sec engagement with a ganker doesn't sound like 'fun'.

Let me tell you this, scouting multiple solar systems, having to covertly scan the potential targets fitting, work out how much dps you need for the target, making bookmarks or having an alt provide a warp in, undocking in your gankalyst and landing on grid just 5 seconds after your target warped off and decided to do something different or was alarmed by your or your alt's presence is not 'fun' either. It is however what you have to deal with being a ganker.

Gankers have to put in time and effort to get their targets, as do most people who are looking for whatever form of PvP. I see no reason why White Knights should be exempt from this.

Ganks are also not foolproof, if you have your DPS/tank numbers off, you could easily fail. Even if you do have them right, you can be warping right into a trap or be caught by someone passing by who is looking for easy kills (the latter happens WAY more often than actual traps). Or my favorite: land on top of your target, go to work just to have a belt rat warp in and jam you when you have him in structure. The ironic part being that that has happened to me more often than being stopped by White Knights.
People think ganking is easy because they only see the end result, a 20 second part of the overall process..

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Froggy Storm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#507 - 2014-09-24 13:23:26 UTC
Honestly, by your own logic, if gank pilots are so "risk adverse" then one moa per system would make them as unwilling to engage as you seem to be. Since you agree that is nonsense perhaps the term "aversion" isn't the one you are actually looking for.

Additionally, if you are unwilling to put yourself at any risk except by engaging targets that are under the concord hammer of justice, why is it poor game play for your opponents to take similar steps by only engaging soft targets?

In fact the entire argument seems predicated on criticizing their game play goals while largely embracing the same core methodology.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#508 - 2014-09-24 13:46:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Veers Belvar
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


They are not brain dead. They use neutral scouts to pick out targets, and will primary DPS ships that try to intervene. How long is your rail fit moa gonna survive when 5 T2 catalysts land on top of it?

What is broken is the fact that criminals can run freely around high security space with nothing more than a 15 minute timeout, regardless of how much carnage they cause. The suicide gankers are the risk averse ones, their exposure is capped at the cost of their cheap gank ship. Everyone else who flies ships that are worth something, and have a purpose beyond suicide ganking, are the real risk takers.

You have said repeatedly that you will only engage with someone who is already under fire from CONCORD, you have also stated you are proactive in terms of ganking avoidance, what risks are you talking about again?


I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I fly expensive ships worth billions of isk, entering into a limited engagement with a ganker would entail major risk for me. Even just flying around with the possibility of being ganked carries significant risk. Not so for dedicated gank alts who fly cheap gank ships that they expect to lose anyway. Their total possible risk exposure is ship + pod, which is often worth 100x less than my ship + pod. So yes, their choice to fly cheap gank ships is a form of risk aversion, much like my choice to fly expensive ships is a form of risk taking. But that is fine, what troubles me is a) how easy it is for a gang of gankalysts to destroy my extremely expensive battleship, and b) the lack of real consequences to them of doing so, despite their being career criminal suicide gankers.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#509 - 2014-09-24 14:07:48 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


They are not brain dead. They use neutral scouts to pick out targets, and will primary DPS ships that try to intervene. How long is your rail fit moa gonna survive when 5 T2 catalysts land on top of it?

What is broken is the fact that criminals can run freely around high security space with nothing more than a 15 minute timeout, regardless of how much carnage they cause. The suicide gankers are the risk averse ones, their exposure is capped at the cost of their cheap gank ship. Everyone else who flies ships that are worth something, and have a purpose beyond suicide ganking, are the real risk takers.

You have said repeatedly that you will only engage with someone who is already under fire from CONCORD, you have also stated you are proactive in terms of ganking avoidance, what risks are you talking about again?


I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I fly expensive ships worth billions of isk, entering into a limited engagement with a ganker would entail major risk for me. Even just flying around with the possibility of being ganked carries significant risk. Not so for dedicated gank alts who fly cheap gank ships that they expect to lose anyway. Their total possible risk exposure is ship + pod, which is often worth 100x less than my ship + pod. So yes, their choice to fly cheap gank ships is a form of risk aversion, much like my choice to fly expensive ships is a form of risk taking. But that is fine, what troubles me is a) how easy it is for a gang of gankalysts to destroy my extremely expensive battleship, and b) the lack of real consequences to them of doing so, despite their being career criminal suicide gankers.

Now in High Definition!
Colonel Falkenberg
Zero Compliance
#510 - 2014-09-24 14:21:09 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I fly expensive ships worth billions of isk, entering into a limited engagement with a ganker would entail major risk for me. Even just flying around with the possibility of being ganked carries significant risk. Not so for dedicated gank alts who fly cheap gank ships that they expect to lose anyway. Their total possible risk exposure is ship + pod, which is often worth 100x less than my ship + pod. So yes, their choice to fly cheap gank ships is a form of risk aversion, much like my choice to fly expensive ships is a form of risk taking. But that is fine, what troubles me is a) how easy it is for a gang of gankalysts to destroy my extremely expensive battleship, and b) the lack of real consequences to them of doing so, despite their being career criminal suicide gankers.




EVE rule # 1

-Never undock in a ship you can't afford to replace.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#511 - 2014-09-24 14:22:04 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:


I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I fly expensive ships worth billions of isk, entering into a limited engagement with a ganker would entail major risk for me. Even just flying around with the possibility of being ganked carries significant risk. Not so for dedicated gank alts who fly cheap gank ships that they expect to lose anyway. Their total possible risk exposure is ship + pod, which is often worth 100x less than my ship + pod. So yes, their choice to fly cheap gank ships is a form of risk aversion, much like my choice to fly expensive ships is a form of risk taking. But that is fine, what troubles me is a) how easy it is for a gang of gankalysts to destroy my extremely expensive battleship, and b) the lack of real consequences to them of doing so, despite their being career criminal suicide gankers.

Now in High Definition![/quote]

I'm still not sure what you are trying to say. When I undock I face the risk of losing a mult-billion isk ship to suicide ganking. When the suicide ganker undocks he faces the risk of losing his 10 million isk catalyst, and often has a 100% SRP in place.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#512 - 2014-09-24 14:24:01 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Even just flying around with the possibility of being ganked carries significant risk.
Bullshit, the risk of being ganked is tiny, it only increases if you're daft enough to afk in a loot piƱata.

Quote:
Not so for dedicated gank alts who fly cheap gank ships that they expect to lose anyway. Their total possible risk exposure is ship + pod, which is often worth 100x less than my ship + pod. So yes, their choice to fly cheap gank ships is a form of risk aversion, much like my choice to fly expensive ships is a form of risk taking.
Nope, flying cheap ships because you know that they're going to explode is risk management, not risk aversion. Just as choosing to actually be at the keyboard when flying expensive ships is risk management.

Quote:
But that is fine, what troubles me is a) how easy it is for a gang of gankalysts to destroy my extremely expensive battleship,
And we're back to isk tanking again......

Quote:
and b) the lack of real consequences to them of doing so, despite their being career criminal suicide gankers.
You know this to be utter bollocks. By virtue of their sec status career suicide ganking characters are locked out of many gameplay options, can be attacked by anybody etc, those are very real consequences for their chosen playstyle.



In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#513 - 2014-09-24 14:24:06 UTC
Colonel Falkenberg wrote:




EVE rule # 1

-Never undock in a ship you can't afford to replace.


Well I can certainly afford to replace it. It doesn't change the fact that game mechanics make it easy for a swarm of cheap ships to gank a much more expensive one, or the fact that dedicated -10 gank alts can still effectively spend their time suicide ganking with no more punishment than a 15 minute slap on the wrist from CONCORD after the destruction of their cheap gank ship.
Colonel Falkenberg
Zero Compliance
#514 - 2014-09-24 14:52:29 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Colonel Falkenberg wrote:




EVE rule # 1

-Never undock in a ship you can't afford to replace.


Well I can certainly afford to replace it. It doesn't change the fact that game mechanics make it easy for a swarm of cheap ships to gank a much more expensive one, or the fact that dedicated -10 gank alts can still effectively spend their time suicide ganking with no more punishment than a 15 minute slap on the wrist from CONCORD after the destruction of their cheap gank ship.



Well... life is a ***** sometimes. Adapt. Overcome.
Leto Thule
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#515 - 2014-09-24 14:57:51 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

Well I can certainly afford to replace it. It doesn't change the fact that game mechanics make it easy for a swarm of cheap ships to gank a much more expensive one, or the fact that dedicated -10 gank alts can still effectively spend their time suicide ganking with no more punishment than a 15 minute slap on the wrist from CONCORD after the destruction of their cheap gank ship.


Ok, what about in low/null/wh?

Are you proposing ships in HS get higher EHP to avoid gankers? The same thing can happen in other areas of EvE, in that a single, blinged out battleship gets blapped by a small squadron of AF's (or whatever). My point here is that you would have to change the entire game to do anything about the "problem" that you are perceiving. Just because something costs more does not mean that it is suppose to trump things that cost less.

I know real world comparisons are not what this game is based on, but think of it in terms of real-world naval warfare.

A single jet, armed with an Exorcet missile, can CRIPPLE a multi-billion dollar aircraft carrier.

A fleet of destroyers could easily destroy a battleship.

The game isnt simply rock-paper-scissors. Granted, there is a lot of that, but the scope is intended to be broad, not just more ISK=win.

Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment

Froggy Storm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#516 - 2014-09-24 14:58:11 UTC
So what we are really seeing is that you think an expesive ship should only be at risk to an equally expensive one. It isn't about ganking at all but about how dare the game allow game play where the wealthy can be harmed by those beneath their station.

This is a tracking titan thread isn't it?
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#517 - 2014-09-24 15:00:43 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
the fact that game mechanics make it easy for a swarm of cheap ships to gank a much more expensive one, or the fact that dedicated -10 gank alts can still effectively spend their time suicide ganking with no more punishment than a 15 minute slap on the wrist from CONCORD after the destruction of their cheap gank ship.

why is any of this a problem again?
CCP Falcon wrote:
you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden.

Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.

While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode.

The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things.

True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond.

The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top.

EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered.

EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish.

EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers.

Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions.

EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time.

Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced.

That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence.

Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#518 - 2014-09-24 15:11:14 UTC
Froggy Storm wrote:
So what we are really seeing is that you think an expesive ship should only be at risk to an equally expensive one. It isn't about ganking at all but about how dare the game allow game play where the wealthy can be harmed by those beneath their station.

This is a tracking titan thread isn't it?

cant be because that would require veers to

a) leave highsec

b) have friends

and

c) actually play eve
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#519 - 2014-09-24 15:41:29 UTC  |  Edited by: IIshira
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


They are not brain dead. They use neutral scouts to pick out targets, and will primary DPS ships that try to intervene. How long is your rail fit moa gonna survive when 5 T2 catalysts land on top of it?

What is broken is the fact that criminals can run freely around high security space with nothing more than a 15 minute timeout, regardless of how much carnage they cause. The suicide gankers are the risk averse ones, their exposure is capped at the cost of their cheap gank ship. Everyone else who flies ships that are worth something, and have a purpose beyond suicide ganking, are the real risk takers.

You have said repeatedly that you will only engage with someone who is already under fire from CONCORD, you have also stated you are proactive in terms of ganking avoidance, what risks are you talking about again?


I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I fly expensive ships worth billions of isk, entering into a limited engagement with a ganker would entail major risk for me..


So you make fun of gankers for attacking targets that can't shoot back but you're too cowardly to do the same... Awesome


Actually having a limited engagement timer with another player is a scary thing... Twisted
Renegade Heart
Doomheim
#520 - 2014-09-24 17:08:05 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
what troubles me is a) how easy it is for a gang of gankalysts to destroy my extremely expensive battleship, and b) the lack of real consequences to them of doing so, despite their being career criminal suicide gankers.


Then go play another game if this one troubles you. Complaining on the forums about how it's troubling for you is pathetic. Also, you keep going on about how gankers have no real consequences for their actions. It is almost as if you assume that no mains would ever go -10 and suicide gank anyone.

This is my main. I am -10 and gank people in high sec. I have very real consequences for this lifestyle. Everyone in high sec can freely attack me, without concord protecting me. They don't need to war dec me. I can no longer run missions in highsec for example, without overwhelming NPC forces blowing me up. I'd have to pay a substantial amount of isk for tags to raise up my sec enough to do that again, or rat it up, spending hours to fix it, just for ganking a few pods.

is your real problem with gank alts? What about other alts? This is EvE. Alts are fine. Deal with it! You are probably more suited to other games though. Perhaps you could go enjoy the world of Hello Kitty Online? Wikipedia says this about that game:

"Hello Kitty Online contains no direct PvP, though players may choose to compete amongst themselves in a number of available minigames."