These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Pirate Battleships & Absurd Ganker Arguments

First post
Author
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#221 - 2017-02-27 00:17:06 UTC
^^ I was right, full of bile and unintended irony.

Thanks Aaron.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#222 - 2017-02-27 00:22:48 UTC
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Its no-one elses problem if your scanning ship explodes, than your own.

You dont need a scanning ship to suicide gank.

If you want to invasively investigate my private fit/hold, for data as to whether to attack me or not, I should be able to retaliate for you doing so.

The argument that "I should be able to pry into your private ship/hold data, so as to decide whether to suicide gank you or not, and there is nothing you can do about it" is crap.

What goddam business is it of yours what my fit is or what Im carrying?

If you are going to invade my personal data, for purposes of deciding whether to suicide gank me, I should be able to defend myself by eliminating you.

IRL if you think Im going to stand by while you investigate the contents of my car, my pockets/bag or my house for purposes of destroying them and stealing their contents, you better believe I will come at you with all force available to me.

PS: As to any other activity that uses a cargo scanner, exploration does to investigate relic/data/ghost can contents.
Again your dishonesty is apparent. If you had spent even 5s on considering this, you would not have had to ask.


And here we get to the truth, this was never about more pvp but pushing for even higher levels of safety via nerfs. We have several counters to scanning, we can already blow up the scanning ship, you can also avoid being locked entirely. This is just another call to nerf ganking so you don't have to put any effort into your own gameplay.



get a life and pull your head out of your ass, forum clown. suicide ganking is all about no risk for potentially enormous reward and is a huge part of why your game is such a joke that nobody wants to play. The penalties for suicide ganking are negligible and that is why every one of you pathetic shitters are doing that instead of doing real pvp against people who actually shoot back.

if suicide gankers didn't have it so easy those shitters might be out doing real pvp instead of preying on the unaware and making other players want to quit because of how bullshit it is that griefers should have it so easy. Are you really so stupid that you can't figure that out?


I wonder, can you list all of the risks and punishments a ganker has? Let's see if you know anything about this activity.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#223 - 2017-02-27 00:25:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
baltec1 wrote:
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
...normal trolling rubbish...
I wonder, can you list all of the risks and punishments a ganker has? Let's see if you know anything about this activity.

Don't feed it.

It's just going to come back with 'there are no risks or punishments because blah, blah, blah....the game sux and so does everyone that plays it...blah, blah, blah..."

It's a pointless exercise ever giving it any sort of reply.
Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#224 - 2017-02-27 02:58:14 UTC
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
Spenser for Hire wrote:
Why aren't the shining, holy Gankers riding to the rescue of the market and Ganking the corps and players that are farming pirate LP and protecting the market from being driven into the ground which is the righteous, holy quest of the Gankers?


Because gankers haven't taken a vow to protect the market. They gank people because it's both fun and profitable.

Also, you should probably look at the study CCP did that basically says you're wrong. People who got ganked were actually more likely to stay with EvE. I'd further argue that someone who gets ganked and quits as a result wasn't going to stay with EvE for more than a few months anyway, although I'm afraid I can't offer up any empirical evidence for that.


I think you and I would get along well. You basically spelled out my philosophy of Eve. I just add that by ganking, if anyone I gank, scam, awox or war dec quits the game, I'm doing them a favor so they can move onto a game more their style, maybe something single player where no one will hurt their feelings.

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.

Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#225 - 2017-02-27 03:00:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Tengu Grib
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Its no-one elses problem if your scanning ship explodes, than your own.

You dont need a scanning ship to suicide gank.

If you want to invasively investigate my private fit/hold, for data as to whether to attack me or not, I should be able to retaliate for you doing so.

The argument that "I should be able to pry into your private ship/hold data, so as to decide whether to suicide gank you or not, and there is nothing you can do about it" is crap.

What goddam business is it of yours what my fit is or what Im carrying?

If you are going to invade my personal data, for purposes of deciding whether to suicide gank me, I should be able to defend myself by eliminating you.

IRL if you think Im going to stand by while you investigate the contents of my car, my pockets/bag or my house for purposes of destroying them and stealing their contents, you better believe I will come at you with all force available to me.

PS: As to any other activity that uses a cargo scanner, exploration does to investigate relic/data/ghost can contents.
Again your dishonesty is apparent. If you had spent even 5s on considering this, you would not have had to ask.


And here we get to the truth, this was never about more pvp but pushing for even higher levels of safety via nerfs. We have several counters to scanning, we can already blow up the scanning ship, you can also avoid being locked entirely. This is just another call to nerf ganking so you don't have to put any effort into your own gameplay.



get a life and pull your head out of your ass, forum clown. suicide ganking is all about no risk for potentially enormous reward and is a huge part of why your game is such a joke that nobody wants to play. The penalties for suicide ganking are negligible and that is why every one of you pathetic shitters are doing that instead of doing real pvp against people who actually shoot back.

if suicide gankers didn't have it so easy those shitters might be out doing real pvp instead of preying on the unaware and making other players want to quit because of how bullshit it is that griefers should have it so easy. Are you really so stupid that you can't figure that out?


Baltec a forum clown AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.

NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
State War Academy
Caldari State
#226 - 2017-02-27 04:32:12 UTC  |  Edited by: NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
Tengu Grib wrote:
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Its no-one elses problem if your scanning ship explodes, than your own.

You dont need a scanning ship to suicide gank.

If you want to invasively investigate my private fit/hold, for data as to whether to attack me or not, I should be able to retaliate for you doing so.

The argument that "I should be able to pry into your private ship/hold data, so as to decide whether to suicide gank you or not, and there is nothing you can do about it" is crap.

What goddam business is it of yours what my fit is or what Im carrying?

If you are going to invade my personal data, for purposes of deciding whether to suicide gank me, I should be able to defend myself by eliminating you.

IRL if you think Im going to stand by while you investigate the contents of my car, my pockets/bag or my house for purposes of destroying them and stealing their contents, you better believe I will come at you with all force available to me.

PS: As to any other activity that uses a cargo scanner, exploration does to investigate relic/data/ghost can contents.
Again your dishonesty is apparent. If you had spent even 5s on considering this, you would not have had to ask.


And here we get to the truth, this was never about more pvp but pushing for even higher levels of safety via nerfs. We have several counters to scanning, we can already blow up the scanning ship, you can also avoid being locked entirely. This is just another call to nerf ganking so you don't have to put any effort into your own gameplay.



get a life and pull your head out of your ass, forum clown. suicide ganking is all about no risk for potentially enormous reward and is a huge part of why your game is such a joke that nobody wants to play. The penalties for suicide ganking are negligible and that is why every one of you pathetic shitters are doing that instead of doing real pvp against people who actually shoot back.

if suicide gankers didn't have it so easy those shitters might be out doing real pvp instead of preying on the unaware and making other players want to quit because of how bullshit it is that griefers should have it so easy. Are you really so stupid that you can't figure that out?


Baltec a forum clown AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Nice fake laugh.

Indeed, the degenerate losers who live on these forums arguing endlessly out of inability to concede a point are worst kind of clowns.

some delusional forum kids really need to get a life.
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
State War Academy
Caldari State
#227 - 2017-02-27 04:38:51 UTC  |  Edited by: NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
baltec1 wrote:

I wonder, can you list all of the risks and punishments a ganker has? Let's see if you know anything about this activity.


yea, you lose your ship and take a meaningless sec status hit, can't dock for a while and your victim gets a kill right on you. So Next to nothing. Worst case scenario you lose a ship that you were already willing to pay as a negligible cost in order to blow up someone elses ship.

Try not to be such a narrow-minded forum dwelling twit and accept that the critics of suicide ganking have a point.

suicide gankers have it easymode in EVE, playing with no real risk for potentially tremendous rewards.

EVE is definitely not a harsh and dangerous place for all and the grief monkeys want to keep it ****** like that.
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#228 - 2017-02-27 06:05:00 UTC
Or get out of hisec and the problem disappears.
Nah, not gonna happen.


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Salvos Rhoska
#229 - 2017-02-27 07:43:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Im not arguing scanning ships/cargo should have a suspect timer of moral grounds.
(Although there is an element of that)

Im arguing it as an invasive acquisition of someone elses data, at no risk/cost.

Suicide ganking itself incurs a 100% fatality from CONCORD.
Hauling the loot applies a suspect timer.

But scanning incurs no penalty or cost..

Some here are trying to argue that scanning causing a suspect timer would
A) Nerf suicide ganking. It does not. Scanning and suicide ganking are two different actions.
B) Nerfs HS PvP. It does not. It increases it, as the scanning ship can be attacked post-change.

I understsnd the efforts here to lump scanning into suicide ganking, as a necessary part of the activity, but it is not.
Its only a convenience to enable greater profits from suicide ganking.
That is fine, in and of itself, and the change will not prevent them from doing so.
It just means the scanning ship must share risk and cost for doing so.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#230 - 2017-02-27 07:49:29 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

B) Nerfs HS PvP. It does not. It increases it, as the scanning ship can be attacked post-change.

Scanning ships can already be attacked. Nothing prevents that now.

What you mean is you want people to be able to engage with no consequence. Increase the consequence for the ganker alts and remove all consequence from everyone else.

There is no reason to shift that balance.

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..."

Salvos Rhoska
#231 - 2017-02-27 07:52:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

B) Nerfs HS PvP. It does not. It increases it, as the scanning ship can be attacked post-change.

Scanning ships can already be attacked. Nothing prevents that now.

What you mean is you want people to be able to engage with no consequence. Increase the consequence for the ganker alts and remove all consequence from everyone else.

There is no reason to shift that balance.


False. Its exactly the inverse.

Any ship in HS can already be attacked by suicide ganking. Incurring a suspect timer for scanning does not prevent that.

I want scanning ships to incur cost/risk commensurate with their actions.

You want scanning ships to be able to scan with no consequence, reducing consequence for the ganking alts in the group effort.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#232 - 2017-02-27 08:36:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Im arguing it as an invasive acquisition of someone elses data, at no risk/cost.
This is the same error in logic that gets used for bumping by people making self-interested arguments.

The scanning ship is at every much the same mechanical risk as any other ship in highsec. If you claim the scanning ship has no risk/cost, then you must also claim the ship being scanned is also at no risk/cost operating in highsec. You likely won't claim that, meaning your assessment of no risk/cost is flawed. If you do claim that, they you are just wrong given the number of ships ganked in highsec is non-zero.

Acquiring data by observation is not a crime. Not in real-life nor in New Eden. If you want a scanning ship to be at risk, then you can shoot it, just like any other ship in New Eden. There might be consequences to your actions, but if you are willing to accept them then have at it.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:
You want scanning ships to be able to scan with no consequence, reducing consequence for the ganking alts in the group effort.
I am pretty sure it is you here arguing for a change of the status quo for nebulous reasons, thus it is you that needs to establish why this is a problem worthy of any developer time.

Scanning another ship should have "no consequences", just like using dscan or combat probes should have none. If you want more interesting game play around it then perhaps there are a more interesting solutions with play and counter-play that could be implemented, but adding just another bit of tedium to keep players from finding each other and interacting doesn't seem like a great game design suggestion to make.
Juss Karbuss
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2017-02-27 09:17:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Juss Karbuss
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

I wonder, can you list all of the risks and punishments a ganker has? Let's see if you know anything about this activity.


yea, you lose your ship and take a meaningless sec status hit, can't dock for a while and your victim gets a kill right on you. So Next to nothing. Worst case scenario you lose a ship that you were already willing to pay as a negligible cost in order to blow up someone elses ship.

Try not to be such a narrow-minded forum dwelling twit and accept that the critics of suicide ganking have a point.

suicide gankers have it easymode in EVE, playing with no real risk for potentially tremendous rewards.

EVE is definitely not a harsh and dangerous place for all and the grief monkeys want to keep it ****** like that.



I this is good point.

It is perfectly fine, that there are pirates in HS. Being a HS pirate/ganker should be profitable, but it should come also at a cost.
My thoughts about it: after 2-3 ganks in HS, the pirate should lose CONCORD support for longer period of time. Means, that no CONCORD ships show up, when the guy is attacked (no matter by whom), basically meaning, that the pirate would be living like in null. Killing a pirate gives you rewards from CONCORD, to reward piratehunters.

This would allow player organized law groups (bountyhunters would be wrong word hehe, considering there is some strange bountyhunting system) and would make some more actual PvP fights in HS instead of just cheap kills.
Juss Karbuss
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#234 - 2017-02-27 09:22:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Juss Karbuss
...
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#235 - 2017-02-27 09:41:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Aaron wrote:
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Its no-one elses problem if your scanning ship explodes, than your own.

You dont need a scanning ship to suicide gank.

If you want to invasively investigate my private fit/hold, for data as to whether to attack me or not, I should be able to retaliate for you doing so.

The argument that "I should be able to pry into your private ship/hold data, so as to decide whether to suicide gank you or not, and there is nothing you can do about it" is crap.

What goddam business is it of yours what my fit is or what Im carrying?

If you are going to invade my personal data, for purposes of deciding whether to suicide gank me, I should be able to defend myself by eliminating you.

IRL if you think Im going to stand by while you investigate the contents of my car, my pockets/bag or my house for purposes of destroying them and stealing their contents, you better believe I will come at you with all force available to me.

PS: As to any other activity that uses a cargo scanner, exploration does to investigate relic/data/ghost can contents.
Again your dishonesty is apparent. If you had spent even 5s on considering this, you would not have had to ask.


And here we get to the truth, this was never about more pvp but pushing for even higher levels of safety via nerfs. We have several counters to scanning, we can already blow up the scanning ship, you can also avoid being locked entirely. This is just another call to nerf ganking so you don't have to put any effort into your own gameplay.




get a life and pull your head out of your ass, forum clown. suicide ganking is all about no risk for potentially enormous reward and is a huge part of why your game is such a joke that nobody wants to play. The penalties for suicide ganking are negligible and that is why every one of you pathetic shitters are doing that instead of doing real pvp against people who actually shoot back.

if suicide gankers didn't have it so easy those shitters might be out doing real pvp instead of preying on the unaware and making other players want to quit because of how bullshit it is that griefers should have it so easy. Are you really so stupid that you can't figure that out?


Pilots are unaware that there is a massive cross hair on their ship because they have overloaded the value of their freighter??

The facts are suicide ganking only exists because people are not paying attention. Fyi, one can avoid being ganked by scouting with an alt, in terms of a freighter you can split your loads to the value of 1 billion and haul yourself or contract the 1 billion value packages to red frog to haul for a fair fee.

There is more than enough here to stop people being ganked. This is a social game where you can flourish by working within a team of people and listening.

Ganking and overloaded cargos have no correlation. As stated previously I pulled up a number of freighter ganks on Zkill. Of the first 17 ganks 13 were empty or near empty freighters with an average total loss of around 1.4 bill including hull. The only thing they were loaded with was fresh air. What youre saying here is ganker apologist myth.

Edit: just checked zkill very first gank on there a near empty freighter (kir buxou) by Karma Fleet with stealth bombers.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#236 - 2017-02-27 10:20:52 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

I wonder, can you list all of the risks and punishments a ganker has? Let's see if you know anything about this activity.


yea, you lose your ship and take a meaningless sec status hit, can't dock for a while and your victim gets a kill right on you. So Next to nothing. Worst case scenario you lose a ship that you were already willing to pay as a negligible cost in order to blow up someone elses ship.

Try not to be such a narrow-minded forum dwelling twit and accept that the critics of suicide ganking have a point.

suicide gankers have it easymode in EVE, playing with no real risk for potentially tremendous rewards.

EVE is definitely not a harsh and dangerous place for all and the grief monkeys want to keep it ****** like that.


Well in that case lets put the exact same punishments on anyone who shoots an NPC ship. After all, according to you its risk and punishment free.

So they now get:

  • Ship destroyed by a force that cannot be tanked, cannot be avoided and which will both jam and neut you dry near instantly upon spawning.

  • 6-19 seconds to carry out their hostile actions

  • Security standing hit for every target they kill

  • No insurance payout for their ship loss

  • 15 minute timer where if they undock or enter a new ship in space CONCORD will attack and destroy their ship

  • any loot that drops has a 50/50 chance of being destroyed per stack of items

  • killrights are placed against them that can be sold on the open market

  • When their security status hits -5 they can be openly attacked by anyone

  • at -5 security status the faction police and gate guns will also open fire, web and scram

  • assuming the same tactics are employed that gankers use, the gank ship will be profitable itself to gank (up to 18 mil drop + salvage for the bomber, 46 mil + salvage for the talos, 7 mil + salvage for the catalyst)

  • any loot will need to be scooped by a hauler which will be put at risk.

  • attempting to avoid concord is a bannable offence

  • attempting to avoid negative sec status by deleting your character is a bannable offence

  • Cost to improve your security status from -10 using tags currently stands at 308,373,365.59 isk

  • [*] No guarantee the attack will work
    Salvos Rhoska
    #237 - 2017-02-27 10:21:06 UTC
    Black Pedro wrote:
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    Im arguing it as an invasive acquisition of someone elses data, at no risk/cost.
    This is the same error in logic that gets used for bumping by people making self-interested arguments.

    The scanning ship is at every much the same mechanical risk as any other ship in highsec. If you claim the scanning ship has no risk/cost, then you must also claim the ship being scanned is also at no risk/cost operating in highsec. You likely won't claim that, meaning your assessment of no risk/cost is flawed. If you do claim that, they you are just wrong given the number of ships ganked in highsec is non-zero.

    Acquiring data by observation is not a crime. Not in real-life nor in New Eden. If you want a scanning ship to be at risk, then you can shoot it, just like any other ship in New Eden. There might be consequences to your actions, but if you are willing to accept them then have at it.

    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    You want scanning ships to be able to scan with no consequence, reducing consequence for the ganking alts in the group effort.
    I am pretty sure it is you here arguing for a change of the status quo for nebulous reasons, thus it is you that needs to establish why this is a problem worthy of any developer time.

    Scanning another ship should have "no consequences", just like using dscan or combat probes should have none. If you want more interesting game play around it then perhaps there are a more interesting solutions with play and counter-play that could be implemented, but adding just another bit of tedium to keep players from finding each other and interacting doesn't seem like a great game design suggestion to make.


    1) All ships incur a mechanical risk/cost when in space, regardless of fit or actions. Nobody had argued against that, or claimed otherwise.(Do not fly that which you cannot afford to lose).

    2) Scanning a ship=/= observation. Its an active, module based intrusion into another players data, beyond mere observation.

    3) Scanning another ships fit/cargo, should have consequences. D-scan does not require a module. Combat probing requires time and does not pry into the ships fit/cargo. This is like comparing apples, to oranges, to limes.

    4) Incurring a suspect penalty for scanning another ship in HS:
    -Allows for counterplay by others to engage the scanning ship.
    -Allows for players to find and interact with scanning ships.
    -Does not prevent someone from scanning.
    -Does not prevent suicide ganking.

    5) If you want to acquire fit/cargo information of a potential target, there should be a risk/consequence for that data.
    Untold numbers of scanning ships operating at untold gates, scanning untold numbers of ships, is hardly something that can be argued as increasing player interaction or content.

    If those ships go suspect for doing so, however, player interaction will escalate dramatically, as they now become potential targets themselves.

    It is rational, that if a player is attempting to ascertain whether a ship is to be a target, by intrusively, actively prying into its fit/hold, that player themself should also become a potential target.

    The tactical value of fit/cargo data is enormous. As you and others have highlighted, and confirmed it is important to assessing the risk/reward of engaging that target via suicide gank.

    This is well and fine. But the player doing the scanning should also incur risk/cost for acquiring that valuable data.

    A suspect timer fulfills this, does not change suicide ganking mechanics, does not reduce pvp in aggregate (rather increases it), and applies a rational cost/risk for acquiring valuable data beneficial to ascertaining what target to suicide gank.
    Salvos Rhoska
    #238 - 2017-02-27 10:27:48 UTC
    baltec1 wrote:
    Well in that case lets put the exact same punishments on anyone who shoots an NPC ship. After all, according to you its risk and punishment free.

    NPCs are not players, or capsuleers.

    A suspect timer is not a "punishment".
    Its a mechanic which enables NPC free player conflict, as a consequence of taking action against another player.
    Black Pedro
    Mine.
    #239 - 2017-02-27 10:28:05 UTC
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    snip

    Not convinced.

    You are making intel gathering a suspect-level offence for dubious reasons. I see no plausible way this change would increase player interaction and activity, only decrease it.

    Good luck getting your idea implemented.
    Shae Tadaruwa
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #240 - 2017-02-27 10:28:34 UTC
    Salvos Rhoska wrote:
    ... reducing consequence for the ganking alts in the group effort.

    Typical stupid Salvos 'logic'. I don't want to reduce anything.

    Scanning ships can be ganked, just like any other. No change needed.

    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..."