EVE Search - Hulk ganking

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Science and Industry

Hulk ganking

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Elemental Dark	Posted - 2009.06.26 15:44:00 - [1] Hi all , was reacently ganked by a megathron in a 0.6 system , needless to say I didnt know this person nor the corp and have never had dealings with them in the past . I had t2 strips with some t2 crystals in them and 2 cargo rigs t1 . Just wondering whate the possable proffit from ganking/salveging the wreck and loosing a mega would be ?? Not complaining , lets just say that mining in semi high sec made me complacent , just wondering ! Cheers in advance , ED
yani dumyat Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2009.06.26 15:54:00 - [2] Suicide gankathron is 40 mill ish after insurance though ganking hulks is a bit of a c+p fad at the moment so they probably wanted the e-peen as much as the loot. Sig_________________________________________________________________________________ My alliance, corp, psychiatrist and parole officer claim no responsibility for my actions on these forums.
Elemental Dark	Posted - 2009.06.26 15:58:00 - [3] Cheers for the quick response , just thought that I should also not that they left the 110k of conc veld , albit they turned it over to a con of there own , but still , sorta validates the theory of the E-peen lol . Also what does the C+P ( think thats what you said) mean ? ED
Karox Lominax	Posted - 2009.06.26 16:14:00 - [4] C + P is crime and punishment, a subforum of these forums, where basically all the piratey types hang out. And to put it quite simply, they gank you because they can, in order to spoil your day. They see it as a victory that no matter what it costs them, they have made your life miserable. Although, as has rightly been said, the cost is fairly low with t1 mods and insurance. Typically ships like thoraxes are used for massive firepower, and very minimal cost. Sometimes there is a tactical reason for doing it (cutting off supply lines to known affiliated corps with war targets) but more often than not, its just for laughs. Think playground bullies in the digital age I guess. Mind you, it is fun when they come in all red and flashy from losing so much sec status, and you catch them on the gate with a warp disrupter whilst the appropriate response team comes charging in to blow them to little bits.
yani dumyat Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2009.06.26 16:23:00 - [5] It started in this thread. Agreeing with Karox that carrying a sensor booster and point in high sec can get you a surprising amount of kills.
corestwo Goonfleet Investment Banking GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.06.26 17:30:00 - [6] I know the guy who ganked you. Suffice it to say, more will come...and not just from him. Jihad is coming.
Clair Bear Perkone	Posted - 2009.06.26 17:50:00 - [7] Oh hi there! You might recognize me from the lossmail. It's definitely not epeen I'm after. I mean, I'm an industry carebear, what use do I have for killboards? It costs me approximately 76M to manufacture a megathron 1 jump from Jita (). The guns on it were 400k each, magstabs 21k per. 28 rounds of navy antimatter is reasonably cheap. Scrams, tracking mods and drones are inexpensive as well. By the time the dust settles I'm paying about 80M for my ship and fittings, of which 73.5 million is covered by insurance. Strip miners usually pay for the gank, and the occasional t2 armor plate is the profit. My actions have had the exact desired effect -- you are much less complacent about mining in highsec. BTW, you had the best tank of the two hulks I ganked that day. A guy in Soba lasted only two volleys, which made me a sad panda. And as cores said, there's a storm coming! () actual megathron cost significantly lower since I obtain mountains of minerals through mission trash buy orders and own a researched BPO And in summary, bigger blobs are the answer. Now what was the question?
BackAlley Butch Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.26 18:14:00 - [8] Originally by: Clair Bear And as cores said, there's a storm coming! What's hilarious is that you don't realize how incredibly pathetic you look! Excellent comedy, thanks!
Soldis Minmatar Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.26 18:55:00 - [9] Edited by: Soldis on 26/06/2009 18:58:03 It used to be possible to gank a Hulk with a single Brutix battlecruiser, but CCP fixed it so that Concord responds faster, and now it requires the firepower of a battleship. Hulks seem to be the primary users of Gisti Small Shield Boosters. Even if this precious shield booster is found in your wreck 1/4 of the time, then it's worth losing 4 battleships. The T2 miners and crystals help a little too. On top of that, the salvage from your Hulk wreck can also be very interesting. There is also the possibility of stockpiling Gisti boosters and reselling them as they get scarce temporarily, and the same with the minerals the Hulk in high-sec mine the most. Though, I expect only the Great Prophet to have the resources to dabble in this business.
Kurfin	Posted - 2009.06.26 19:41:00 - [10] Even if you weren't complacent there isn't much you can do if you're in a belt. Staying aligned can be easily mitigated by a bumping frigate, and after that Hulks really can't take much of a beating. They don't have enough CPU and Grid to fit a cruiser sized tank, to match their cruiser size sig radius, and they don't have the agility to GTFO after a bumping. Mining missions is probably the best defence. Yes you can be scanned down, but when there are plenty of easy to find hulks in the belts the gankers are unlikely to bother. I just wish our fellow miners would stop whining about it (I know the OP isn't, but lots do) as it only encourages the gankers. Likewise faction mods, you're just painting a big bullseye on yourself. In high sec you don't need faction gear to resist the rats, and against a suicide gank it's doubtful that it would even make you survive another volley let alone save your ship. Rant over. On a positive note though, of all the hundreds and thousands of hulks mining high sec it is still only a tiny percentage that get ganked.

Tesal	Posted - 2009.06.26 19:52:00 - [11] Originally by: Clair Bear Oh hi there! You might recognize me from the lossmail. It's definitely not epeen I'm after. I mean, I'm an industry carebear, what use do I have for killboards? It costs me approximately 76M to manufacture a megathron 1 jump from Jita (). The guns on it were 400k each, magstabs 21k per. 28 rounds of navy antimatter is reasonably cheap. Scrams, tracking mods and drones are inexpensive as well. By the time the dust settles I'm paying about 80M for my ship and fittings, of which 73.5 million is covered by insurance. Strip miners usually pay for the gank, and the occasional t2 armor plate is the profit. My actions have had the exact desired effect -- you are much less complacent about mining in highsec. BTW, you had the best tank of the two hulks I ganked that day. A guy in Soba lasted only two volleys, which made me a sad panda. And as cores said, there's a storm coming! () actual megathron cost significantly lower since I obtain mountains of minerals through mission trash buy orders and own a researched BPO Crime and Punishment had an interesting thread on this topic that vanished from the forums for some reason. The hulk killing has gone viral now I think, and people are starting to talk about doing it all around. I worked on a little research contract on this on how to defeat it and looked at various options and tested them. Basically it can't be stopped. There isn't an in game mechanic that can adequately defend against it. This is risk free isk topped off with mountains of emo rage for the people who do it. My advice is to start fitting a damage control unit, but that won't be enough if they bring a battleship.
Vasundhara	Posted - 2009.06.26 20:07:00 - [12] Pretty refreshing to see this type of thread handled so politely on both sides of the table. I feel a little sorry for empire miners in that not only is their profession less profitable than L4 missions, they are a far easier target for gank. Not that you can't gank a mission runner, but mission runners certainly fit a broader profile of defense capability than the typical Hulk does. Be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Mavolio Viziam	Posted - 2009.06.26 20:17:00 - [13] doesn't using some alt to shoot your self to get concord in the belt already work any more?
Shiangti Caldari	Posted - 2009.06.26 20:22:00 - [14] Originally by: Tesal There isn't an in game mechanic that can adequately defend against it. This is risk free isk topped off with mountains of emo rage for the people who do it. Right now no, but actually there was talk of removing the insurance payout from those people who are killed by concord a couple of patches/expansions ago. If insurance was removed (from those concordokkened) that would make the financial aspect much more perilous for the ganker because it would cost them the full amount for their ship loss and get no insurance back. (only from what ever drops from the gankee) I can just imagine the emo rage/quit from C+P if CCP were to actually implement it. It would not stop ganking entirely, but would make it as not profitable or at least MUCH more costly to the ganker.
Vasundhara	Posted - 2009.06.26 20:23:00 - [15] Originally by: Mavolio doesn't using some alt to shoot your self to get concord in the belt already work any more? Now there is a service for an enterprising new player to get involved in ;)
Vasundhara	Posted - 2009.06.26 20:30:00 - [16] Edited by: Vasundhara on 26/06/2009 20:30:43 Originally by: Shiangti Right now no, but actually there was talk of removing the insurance payout from those people who are killed by concord a couple of patches/expansions ago. I wouldn't go as far as to remove the insurance but adding a penalty for death due by Concord would be a control CCP could do to alter the incentive. You want there to be an element of risk but in empire that risk should hover relatively low. The incentive should be set such that a really sweet target in empire is probably worth it but most of the time it's more questionable. For a pirate to make a consistent profit, or even break even, by just popping normally fitted Hulks in empire is probably something that should be looked at. Honestly, orchestrating a huge Jihad is probably the best way to get this addressed.
Dariah Stardweller	Posted - 2009.06.26 21:54:00 - [17] Originally by: Mavolio doesn't using some alt to shoot your self to get concord in the belt already work any more? I think it does. Hm, would smartbombing a few secured containers in a belt to get multiple concord spawns be possible?
Miranda Ricsko Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.26 22:18:00 - [18] Originally by: Shiangti Originally by: Tesal There isn't an in game mechanic that can adequately defend against it. This is risk free isk topped off with mountains of emo rage for the people who do it. Right now no, but actually there was talk of removing the insurance payout from those people who are killed by concord a couple of patches/expansions ago. If insurance was removed (from those concordokkened) that would make the financial aspect much more perilous for the ganker because it would cost them the full amount for their ship loss and get no insurance back. (only from what ever drops from the gankee) I can just imagine the emo rage/quit from C+P if CCP were to actually implement it. It would not stop ganking entirely, but would make it as not profitable or at least MUCH more costly to the ganker. I think that would be a great system, and it's actually more realistic. If your ship gets trashed by the authorities while you're engaged in criminal activity, an insurance company should in no way pay out.
Mavolio Viziam	Posted - 2009.06.26 22:36:00 - [19] This is a game for fun tho not real life. How much fun would it be if some 4-5 month old char who had just spent their last isk on a ship accidentaly got it concorded. So in my opinion no payout isn't rly a good solution. At the most it should just be a reduction in the payout to make it less profitable.
Vasundhara	Posted - 2009.06.26 22:48:00 - [20] Originally by: Miranda Ricsko I think that would be a great system, and it's actually more realistic. If your ship gets trashed by the authorities while you're engaged in criminal activity, an insurance company should in no way pay out. Personally I would prefer things be modeled in a way that parallels reality but creating a desirable game dynamic is going to trump having things be realistic. Ganking in empire is a dynamic that I think adds positively to the risk management nature of the game. Having secure space not be totally secure means that you can reduce your risk in empire but not eliminate it. In order to preserve that margin of risk in empire you need to create some incentive for the Ganker apart from just taking a loss in return for lulz / tears. Reducing insurance payouts for Concord kills is one way to re-tune the risk / reward balance for gankers, but if you totally remove the payout it should be replaced with something else. Some may disagree with me, but I don't think that EvE would be better off on either extreme of having empire be totally risk free or being basically 0.0 space. Having some sense of realism would be nice but I could go on for hours arguing about how you would basically need to re-write EvE from the ground up to even start to approach a modest sense of realism (i.e. Eddison forgot how to make the light-bulb he just invented after he used his plans up). I've written it off as a lost cause ;)

Shiangti Caldari	Posted - 2009.06.26 23:02:00 - [21] Originally by: Mavolio This is a game for fun tho not real life. How much fun would it be if some 4-5 month old char who had just spent their last isk on a ship accidentaly got it concorded. So in my opinion no payout isn't rly a good solution. At the most it should just be a reduction in the payout to make it less profitable. There is an annoying pop up warning box that you have to click ok to before you can do a criminal act that will rate being concorddokkened. If a relatively new character such as you describe is in that situation, although I would feel bad, I would use the standard CCP line: "We are sorry for your loss, and hope that you will quickly recover." Also, a Hulk's insurance payout is peanuts since it is a T2 ship compared to the actual amount of isk sunk into them. Plus, if the character was accidentally concorded, I am sure he could petition it and get his ship back if he was concorded through no fault of his own.
Miranda Ricsko Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.26 23:18:00 - [22] Originally by: Mavolio This is a game for fun tho not real life. How much fun would it be if some 4-5 month old char who had just spent their last isk on a ship accidentaly got it concorded. So in my opinion no payout isn't rly a good solution. At the most it should just be a reduction in the payout to make it less profitable. Like was stated, there's a popup box warning before you do something illegal. A newbie making a mistake and learning from it is a lot less costly than people being able to gank Hulks with practically no loss in highsec space due to the ******ed insurance company blindly funding their criminal (and idiotic, since it doesn't make sense) activities. Going after a target in highsec should be costly enough where you only do it if you have a very good reason, or if you just want to eat the cost and grief. Deciding to live in the criminal element should involve giving up the luxury of insurance in highsec.
Tesal	Posted - 2009.06.27 00:07:00 - [23] Originally by: Vasundhara Originally by: Miranda Ricsko I think that would be a great system, and it's actually more realistic. If your ship gets trashed by the authorities while you're engaged in criminal activity, an insurance company should in no way pay out. Personally I would prefer things be modeled in a way that parallels reality but creating a desirable game dynamic is going to trump having things be realistic. Ganking in empire is a dynamic that I think adds positively to the risk management nature of the game. Having secure space not be totally secure means that you can reduce your risk in empire but not eliminate it. In order to preserve that margin of risk in empire you need to create some incentive for the Ganker apart from just taking a loss in return for lulz / tears. Reducing insurance payouts for Concord kills is one way to re-tune the risk / reward balance for gankers, but if you totally remove the payout it should be replaced with something else. Some may disagree with me, but I don't think that EvE would be better off on either extreme of having empire be totally risk free or being basically 0.0 space. Having some sense of realism would be nice but I could go on for hours arguing about how you would basically need to re-write EvE from the ground up to even start to approach a modest sense of realism (i.e. Eddison forgot how to make the light-bulb he just invented after he used his plans up). I've written it off as a lost cause ;) I would prefer a mechanic that lets people fight them. Gate guns should be changed to kill more slowly in .5 maybe and do less damage, and maybe be strengthened in a .8, and people should be able to tackle any reds on the gate and fight them. Another option might be to have faction navy ships arrive in waves every 30 seconds bringing progressively more DPS. With weaker gate guns they would be able to stand and fight. I think that would be the most fun. You would be able to do gate fights in high sec this way against bandits. It would allow some pvp outside of a wardec.
Nuzzy Futs Amarr Hedion University	Posted - 2009.06.27 00:29:00 - [24] Originally by: Shiangti ..... I can just imagine the emo rage/quit from C+P if CCP were to actually implement it. It would not stop ganking entirely, but would make it as not profitable or at least MUCH more costly to the ganker. Emo-rage fake gangster tears are the best tears - That would be hilarious to see the forum **** that would create.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.06.27 01:02:00 - [25] Originally by: Nuzzy Futs Originally by: Shiangti ..... I can just imagine the emo rage/quit from C+P if CCP were to actually implement it. It would not stop ganking entirely, but would make it as not profitable or at least MUCH more costly to the ganker. Emo-rage fake gangster tears are the best tears - That would be hilarious to see the forum ** that would create. Well for a start most of us would actually make a point of introducing risk into Highsec in retaliation, rather than as the hobby it is for most of us. I can guarantee you that after a week the tears would be flowing profusely everywhere but C&P. Originally by:** CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Miranda Ricsko Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.27 01:21:00 - [26] Originally by: RedSplat Originally by: Nuzzy Futs Originally by: Shiangti ..... I can just imagine the emo rage/quit from C+P if CCP were to actually implement it. It would not stop ganking entirely, but would make it as not profitable or at least MUCH more costly to the ganker. Emo-rage fake gangster tears are the best tears - That would be hilarious to see the forum **** that would create. Well for a start most of us would actually make a point of introducing risk into Highsec in retaliation, rather than as the hobby it is for most of us. I can guarantee you that after a week the tears would be flowing profusely everywhere but C&P. I'd prefer that and gankers just throw money away if that's their choice, rather than griefing like babies under the umbrella of insurance claims.
Breaker77 Reclamation Industries New Eden Research	Posted - 2009.06.27 03:09:00 - [27] As the carebears keep whining, CCP keeps nerfing ganking in highsec (warp to 0, increased Concord response, ect...). Eventually they will get their way where you won't even be able to lock or agress a non NPC ship in highsec and their is zero risk. It's just depends on how fast the gankers keep attacking people in highsec. The more you gank, the harder the nerfs will be. With 40,000 people logged on and over 10% of them are located in highsec trade hubs, CCP won't lose that monthly income. TLDR: Eve is dieing
Musagetes Gallente Taggart Transdimensional Virtue of Selfishness	Posted - 2009.06.27 04:11:00 - [28] Originally by: Breaker77 The more you gank, the harder the nerfs will be. And that's bad because ...? And while you're on the topic of "zero risk", what risks are there in ganking mining barges and exhumers in a scenario where you know you're going to get blown up by CONCORD anyway? -- Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour.
Future Mutant	Posted - 2009.06.27 05:27:00 - [29] This topic started off well- hulks were going splat and plenty of lol's were had by all.... Then the unimaginative came in with their O M G they r killing our ships! How can that be fair? NERF NERF NERF NERF Heres a tip- you dont like losing your ship learn to fit a tank already. Learn a skill not ore related. I would suggest one of the shield variety. Theyre called extenders get some.
Krylon Rhae	Posted - 2009.06.27 06:25:00 - [30] First off... I am a miner/industrialist and not a ganker. That said, I do not believe stopping the insurance payout 100% to someone zapped by concord is a good idea. I would rather see a scalable hit to their insurance payout so that their free wheeling ganking can be mitigated by sector status. For instance, the insurance payout could be multiplied by the system security status to reduce the payout in such a way that their insurance is reduced by 90% in a .9 system and 50% in a .5 system. New players learning to mine in 1.0 and .9 systems would be relatively safe since risk/reward is associated with the system security status. The true risk averse can mine in relative safety in the higher security zones but the reward is reduced by the types of roids present. The lower the security status the better the roids and the better the opportunity to get ganked by someone more willing to risk a lower payout in anticipation of a better drop. Fitting stronger tanks, mining in teams with a command ship booster, pre-aligning and suicide ganking an alt to get concord in system are all effective deterrents.



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.