These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Mutuality of Freighter Ganking

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#361 - 2016-12-24 21:50:01 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Hmm, if Kusion gets away with it, then loyalanon was removed for "that other reason".

Didn't he spew some stupid hatred in chat or something?

What does that have to do with your bot alignment?

That's a totally different topic. Deserved to be banned as far as I'm concerned.



Bumping is also a totally different topic. BTW I don't play any more. Ban away. You're kind play style has an entire existence based on crying so go cry to someone. There's that little flag button. -->


The butthurt of Herzog is real and visceral.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#362 - 2016-12-24 22:53:11 UTC
Galaxy Duck wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Hmm, if Kusion gets away with it, then loyalanon was removed for "that other reason".

Didn't he spew some stupid hatred in chat or something?

What does that have to do with your bot alignment?

That's a totally different topic. Deserved to be banned as far as I'm concerned.



Bumping is also a totally different topic. BTW I don't play any more. Ban away. You're kind play style has an entire existence based on crying so go cry to someone. There's that little flag button. -->


The butthurt of Herzog is real and visceral.



That you care enough is also real and visceral. I know nerves are being hit here. Bumping is the thing. Ganking was the strawman. Flak means you are over the target. Thanks for participating.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#363 - 2016-12-24 22:59:00 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I know nerves are being hit here. Bumping is the thing. Ganking was the strawman.

Yes I agree with you on something. Bumping is hitting some nerves here.

Bot aligned players should just calm down.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#364 - 2016-12-24 23:02:59 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I know nerves are being hit here. Bumping is the thing. Ganking was the strawman.

Yes I agree with you on something. Bumping is hitting some nerves here.

Bot aligned players should just calm down.



You are still upset because I once said that were it up to me, all mining would be done by NPCs. Twisted

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#365 - 2016-12-24 23:14:35 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
The only way bumping could be addressed properly is if a group started doing it to the level of shutting down a gate, and for no reason. "just because, nyah nyah nyah grief grief grief grief". No ransoms, no ganks.

Would it be ignorable then?



Good luck stopping interceptors, cloaking ships, and even people who know how to use a MWD to get into warp faster....not to mention MJDs.

Next faux problem?

Edit: And stop trying to hijack the thread and turn it into another anti-bumping thread.



You won't face the simple reality that bumping is the last mechanic that is non-compliant to the doctrines of "This is Eve/HTFU".

It's the only thing that can be done by one player while the "solution" for everything else has required more (with the usual litany of "hurr durr this is MMO make friends")

And it's the only thing that you can do with impunity and ZERO consequences.

And your entire religion in this game is based on it. That's pretty obvious. And weak. Your coalescing and sperging on this topic shows your vulnerability.

Maybe someday the game ends up in the hands of marketers who do a little research to find out why this game is seen as such a griefer-favoring pit. Perhaps in the meantime bloggers can ensure that any google search on the matter will result in the first link of the results will be "that mechanic where people who nothing better to do can bump a ship all day and nothing happens to them". They might want to change things then.

That won't be a victory. A victory now against a crap mechanic that you exploit (the lie, gaslight, strawman, and sperg about) would be hollow. Most people in the gaming culture already know to avoid Eve. For a while it was wise not to mention you play Eve, but now at least you meet gamers who simply heard of it but won't look at you as scum for playing it. Enjoy your self-aggrandizement in the meantime. Apparently it's all you have.




You are just ridiculous. I posted two suggestions in relation to bumping and how it might be dealt with and you don't even comment on them.

Truly pathetic. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#366 - 2016-12-24 23:23:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I know nerves are being hit here. Bumping is the thing. Ganking was the strawman.

Yes I agree with you on something. Bumping is hitting some nerves here.

Bot aligned players should just calm down.



You are still upset because I once said that were it up to me, all mining would be done by NPCs. Twisted

Did you say that in this thread? Lol.

Who cares who does the mining. It could be only NPCs as far as I'm concerned. Mining...lol

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#367 - 2016-12-24 23:30:29 UTC
The people complaining about bumping in relation to a freighter gank won't listen to reason. Baltec made a very good point which is a freighter is a solution for a large corp/alliance to use because large corps have the means to use escorts to ensure it is protected. Since bumping has always been in Eve it means that freighters were designed with the fact they could be bumped very easily.

Drac, I think you need to spend your time spreading the word about the flaws in hauling high value, build a network of trusted freighter pilots. So for example if a freighter is bumped the freighter pilot should already be in channel and be able to quickly report he is in distress. The game will then be who can get there first, the gankers or the anti gankers, suicide a few ships in order to jam/web/point the bumpy macherial for a good 20/25 seconds and during this time get a web on the freighter and get it safe.

Yes you said you've adapted but that doesn't show in your attitude, you sold your freighter to be defiant more than to adapt, why not just accept the current state of affairs and keep your cargo below 1 billion value? I know you have an excuse for everything.

Yes, the game is harsh on people that use a freighter solo when its supposed to be part of a large fleet. Yes the game is harsh on people who overload their freight and don't bother to scout.

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#368 - 2016-12-25 00:55:32 UTC
Grrrr gankers.

No more can people complain about cheap, OP destroyers:

https://zkillboard.com/kill/58554280/

Battle gank nereus....Damn industrialist gankers.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#369 - 2016-12-25 01:14:40 UTC
Aaron wrote:


Drac, I think you need to spend your time spreading the word about the flaws in hauling high value, build a network of trusted freighter pilots. So for example if a freighter is bumped the freighter pilot should already be in channel and be able to quickly report he is in distress. The game will then be who can get there first, the gankers or the anti gankers, suicide a few ships in order to jam/web/point the bumpy macherial for a good 20/25 seconds and during this time get a web on the freighter and get it safe.




Drac, I've known you for a long while now and you're the kind of person who has the ability to do a great many things in Eve, people do respect you my only real criticism is that you are very rigid in your attitude towards things.

Going back to our efforts in Stain, I felt we could have made a better go of it. If you had a more accepting attitude and championed things like defending shopping from jita through wormholes instead of refusing to play because there was only a kick out station on the JF path. I did notice that lots of people followed your lead..

What I quoted there is some serious and skillful game play, use it to adopt a role play of what you do in Eve and use everything at your disposal to execute these maneuvers, I can see some technical battles going on if we can have the gankers and the anti gankers both mobilized ready to attend a bump. Enjoy your work drac, enjoy your role despite the mechanics. Find a mechanic of your own to exploit and stop the gankers doing what they do.

You're not going to leave Eve Drac, have a great christmas Big smile

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#370 - 2016-12-25 04:33:55 UTC
March rabbit wrote:

take a look at ECM. No damage inflicted. You just cannot lock objects.
take a look at warp scrambler/disruptor. No damage still.
take a look at sensor and tracking disruptors - no damage again?
Is damage mandatory for aggression?


ECM stops the ships targeting system from working, using it on people in HS is a CONCORD response.
Warp scramblers/distruptors prevent the ships war drive from working, using it in HS results in a CONCORD response.
Sensor and tracking disruptors both interfere with ship systems. Again, eliciting a CONCORD response.

So no damage is not mandatory for aggression, but preventing a ship's systems from operating is.

Bumping on the other hand interferes with no ship systems. All it does is knock a ship out of alignment.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
R-E-A-V-E-R-S
#371 - 2016-12-25 04:51:21 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
March rabbit wrote:

take a look at ECM. No damage inflicted. You just cannot lock objects.
take a look at warp scrambler/disruptor. No damage still.
take a look at sensor and tracking disruptors - no damage again?
Is damage mandatory for aggression?


ECM stops the ships targeting system from working, using it on people in HS is a CONCORD response.
Warp scramblers/distruptors prevent the ships war drive from working, using it in HS results in a CONCORD response.
Sensor and tracking disruptors both interfere with ship systems. Again, eliciting a CONCORD response.

So no damage is not mandatory for aggression, but preventing a ship's systems from operating is.

Bumping on the other hand interferes with no ship systems. All it does is knock a ship out of alignment.

So do you think that bumping needs adjustments in regards to ganking? I ask this because I dont see a way to enforce some kind of suspect or criminal timer when bumping is something that happens on gates, stations, and other various areas.

HTFU
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#372 - 2016-12-25 05:20:57 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Galaxy Duck wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Hmm, if Kusion gets away with it, then loyalanon was removed for "that other reason".

Didn't he spew some stupid hatred in chat or something?

What does that have to do with your bot alignment?

That's a totally different topic. Deserved to be banned as far as I'm concerned.



Bumping is also a totally different topic. BTW I don't play any more. Ban away. You're kind play style has an entire existence based on crying so go cry to someone. There's that little flag button. -->


The butthurt of Herzog is real and visceral.



That you care enough is also real and visceral. I know nerves are being hit here. Bumping is the thing. Ganking was the strawman. Flak means you are over the target. Thanks for participating.


Ah yes, if everyone is making fun of you, then you must really be on to something!
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#373 - 2016-12-25 06:20:41 UTC
Galaxy Duck wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:



That you care enough is also real and visceral. I know nerves are being hit here. Bumping is the thing. Ganking was the strawman. Flak means you are over the target. Thanks for participating.


Ah yes, if everyone is making fun of you, then you must really be on to something!


Coincidentally, this is the same 'logic' that flat-earthers, anti-vaxxers, Scientologists and chemtrailers use to validate their wrong beliefs, too.

“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
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#374 - 2016-12-25 06:28:51 UTC
Faylee Freir wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
March rabbit wrote:

take a look at ECM. No damage inflicted. You just cannot lock objects.
take a look at warp scrambler/disruptor. No damage still.
take a look at sensor and tracking disruptors - no damage again?
Is damage mandatory for aggression?


ECM stops the ships targeting system from working, using it on people in HS is a CONCORD response.
Warp scramblers/distruptors prevent the ships war drive from working, using it in HS results in a CONCORD response.
Sensor and tracking disruptors both interfere with ship systems. Again, eliciting a CONCORD response.

So no damage is not mandatory for aggression, but preventing a ship's systems from operating is.

Bumping on the other hand interferes with no ship systems. All it does is knock a ship out of alignment.

So do you think that bumping needs adjustments in regards to ganking? I ask this because I dont see a way to enforce some kind of suspect or criminal timer when bumping is something that happens on gates, stations, and other various areas.


Holy ****....

I see no reason to change bumping as it currently stands. I have made dozens of posts along these lines.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
R-E-A-V-E-R-S
#375 - 2016-12-25 07:23:36 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
March rabbit wrote:

take a look at ECM. No damage inflicted. You just cannot lock objects.
take a look at warp scrambler/disruptor. No damage still.
take a look at sensor and tracking disruptors - no damage again?
Is damage mandatory for aggression?


ECM stops the ships targeting system from working, using it on people in HS is a CONCORD response.
Warp scramblers/distruptors prevent the ships war drive from working, using it in HS results in a CONCORD response.
Sensor and tracking disruptors both interfere with ship systems. Again, eliciting a CONCORD response.

So no damage is not mandatory for aggression, but preventing a ship's systems from operating is.

Bumping on the other hand interferes with no ship systems. All it does is knock a ship out of alignment.

So do you think that bumping needs adjustments in regards to ganking? I ask this because I dont see a way to enforce some kind of suspect or criminal timer when bumping is something that happens on gates, stations, and other various areas.


Holy ****....

I see no reason to change bumping as it currently stands. I have made dozens of posts along these lines.

Well tbh your thread is easy to derail since it brings up no real talking points, poses no questions, or asks for opinions and feedback... So its easy for people to gravitate toward talking about bumping. Dunno what the end goal of this thread is... But carry on.

HTFU
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#376 - 2016-12-25 07:34:49 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
The only way bumping could be addressed properly is if a group started doing it to the level of shutting down a gate, and for no reason. "just because, nyah nyah nyah grief grief grief grief". No ransoms, no ganks.

Would it be ignorable then?



Good luck stopping interceptors, cloaking ships, and even people who know how to use a MWD to get into warp faster....not to mention MJDs.

Next faux problem?

Edit: And stop trying to hijack the thread and turn it into another anti-bumping thread.



You won't face the simple reality that bumping is the last mechanic that is non-compliant to the doctrines of "This is Eve/HTFU".

It's the only thing that can be done by one player while the "solution" for everything else has required more (with the usual litany of "hurr durr this is MMO make friends")

And it's the only thing that you can do with impunity and ZERO consequences.

And your entire religion in this game is based on it. That's pretty obvious. And weak. Your coalescing and sperging on this topic shows your vulnerability.

Maybe someday the game ends up in the hands of marketers who do a little research to find out why this game is seen as such a griefer-favoring pit. Perhaps in the meantime bloggers can ensure that any google search on the matter will result in the first link of the results will be "that mechanic where people who nothing better to do can bump a ship all day and nothing happens to them". They might want to change things then.

That won't be a victory. A victory now against a crap mechanic that you exploit (the lie, gaslight, strawman, and sperg about) would be hollow. Most people in the gaming culture already know to avoid Eve. For a while it was wise not to mention you play Eve, but now at least you meet gamers who simply heard of it but won't look at you as scum for playing it. Enjoy your self-aggrandizement in the meantime. Apparently it's all you have.




You are just ridiculous. I posted two suggestions in relation to bumping and how it might be dealt with and you don't even comment on them.

Truly pathetic. Roll



I saw them. But you should be well aware that any discussion on what mechanics-related solutions to anything "should be" is akin to talking to a wall. We can talk about mechanics or modules or whatever solution all day, it'll go nowhere. When I make any suggestion along those lines I don't get too deep into any details for that reason. We don't have access to the legacy code and no idea what the implications of any idea would be. I would say "look at my posting history" but that would be redundant. Take my word for it: I don't get into intricate details on actual solutions or what I think a solution should or could be because we're not where the work is getting done. That's why I did not comment on them. It's moot.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#377 - 2016-12-25 07:36:37 UTC
Faylee Freir wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
March rabbit wrote:

take a look at ECM. No damage inflicted. You just cannot lock objects.
take a look at warp scrambler/disruptor. No damage still.
take a look at sensor and tracking disruptors - no damage again?
Is damage mandatory for aggression?


ECM stops the ships targeting system from working, using it on people in HS is a CONCORD response.
Warp scramblers/distruptors prevent the ships war drive from working, using it in HS results in a CONCORD response.
Sensor and tracking disruptors both interfere with ship systems. Again, eliciting a CONCORD response.

So no damage is not mandatory for aggression, but preventing a ship's systems from operating is.

Bumping on the other hand interferes with no ship systems. All it does is knock a ship out of alignment.

So do you think that bumping needs adjustments in regards to ganking? I ask this because I dont see a way to enforce some kind of suspect or criminal timer when bumping is something that happens on gates, stations, and other various areas.


Holy ****....

I see no reason to change bumping as it currently stands. I have made dozens of posts along these lines.

Well tbh your thread is easy to derail since it brings up no real talking points, poses no questions, or asks for opinions and feedback... So its easy for people to gravitate toward talking about bumping. Dunno what the end goal of this thread is... But carry on.


Seriously?

My initial post indicates I have not issue with ganking. My initial post is a coherent defense of ganking. It is a post designed to put to rest to complaint of risk vs. reward when it comes to ganking. Apparently it was successful as nobody is arguing that point anymore in this thread. The discussion has moved on to bumping as a tool for ganking.

From now on if some Bad™ brings up risk vs. reward we can just point to this thread where not only the gankers, but even the AG people have agreed...don't take on too much risk if you are freighter pilot.

In fact, I am tempted to ask ISD to lock this thread as it has done its job. The risk vs. reward question has been raised, discussed, and settled. Nobody apparently disagrees with it. The only remaining issue is bumping, which should probably be it's own thread.

In short...this thread accomplished what I set out to do...put to rest the issue of risk vs. reward in terms of freighter ganking.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#378 - 2016-12-25 07:40:04 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:



I saw them. But you should be well aware that any discussion on what mechanics-related solutions to anything "should be" is akin to talking to a wall. We can talk about mechanics or modules or whatever solution all day, it'll go nowhere. When I make any suggestion along those lines I don't get too deep into any details for that reason. We don't have access to the legacy code and no idea what the implications of any idea would be. I would say "look at my posting history" but that would be redundant. Take my word for it: I don't get into intricate details on actual solutions or what I think a solution should or could be because we're not where the work is getting done. That's why I did not comment on them. It's moot.


Because your suggestions are bad.

Your suggestions are designed to reward those who are stupid, ignorant and/or imprudent.

You are simply bad.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#379 - 2016-12-25 07:47:03 UTC
I have asked ISD to close this thread. My goal was to point out that the issue of risk vs. reward when it comes to ganking is not an issue. The lack of supposed risk on the part of gankers is in fact balanced by the excessive risk that imprudent freighter pilots take on. Nobody seems to disagree with this point after 377 replies and 19 pages. I’ll be bookmarking this thread and whenever some Bad™ brings up risk vs. reward I’ll simply post a link and ask for ISD to close such threads.

I know some want to discuss bumping and that is fine. But that was not the intent of this thread and as such it should be closed and those who want to discuss bumping can start their own thread on that topic.

Thanks to everyone who participated, even those I disagree with.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#380 - 2016-12-25 07:52:20 UTC
Closed via polite request by OP.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department