Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 12:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello,
I have recently returned to EVE and i noticed that there is a lot of suicide ganking, with corps dedicated to it. While i agree they should be allowed to do it, i think it should be more like real life, where if you murder a person the police does not come to destroy your car while allowing you to walk away with all the belongings of the person you murdered.
The Ideea:
CONCORD should give people a fine valued at the total value of the hull.(without fitting)
Why will this work well across the board?
If you are solo ganking an industrial that has cargo of value, the added cost for the lone Stealth Bomber will be the price of the Indy Hull - a small price to pay and it will reflect that industrials are cheap and take little skill to get into.
If you gank a Freighter the fine will be 1bil-1.5bil(the market price of the freighter) but it will be divided so that each person on that kill mail pays an equal sum.
For ex: Freighter cost = 1bil and it was suicide ganked by 10 people = each ganker will pay a fine of 100 mil.
The same would happen if the target is a non hauler ship, making it more risky to equip a T1 Battleship with expensive modules vs a Marauder for example.
Why is this needed?
Because ganking people in high sec is now so inexpensive there are people doing it for the "LULZ". While i think that no Freighter should be completely safe when it hauls expensive cargo, i also think that if you gank an expensive ship that has no deadspace/officer mods on it, you should lose enough isk so that you are unable to just keep doing it all day long.
This way no rebalancing is needed and the suicide gankers can still gank what they like just like it is now, BUT it will now cost them something AND it will help inflation as they money taken from the gankers will be given to CONCORD(esentially taking them out of the game).
|
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
316
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 13:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Your suggestion will remove ganking as viable profession from the game. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
248
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 13:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
they took away insurance for ganking, probably about the only thing you are getting money wise.
Your gankers are now more effective courtesy of crime watch as well. They don't mess around with this like they used to. This would also be why miner bumping is on the rise. I said way in the past this might happen. Make it so they need and not just want the gank more some will get much better at it. Saw this in times in low sec and 0.0. I have died more in low sec camps tbh. They wanted my kills more since its how they get paid. 0.0 can be lazy or sloppy if you get lucky. If a ship gets away, oh well, they will get their 40 mil per tick later in a CA somewhere.
And people have ganked in empire for lola for a while now. This is not new.
|
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 14:00:00 -
[4] - Quote
This will not prevent the ganks, just make it so the ganker loses some money if he does not pick a good target.
If the ganker picks a good target he will still profit.
However if he just wants to gank ships so his PVP stats go up, he will have to buy PLEX-es and pay up.
Or he can go out of High Sec and do PVP.
His choice.
I find it quite natural for CONCORD to force the gankers to pay for the destroyed ship AND confiscate(destroy) their ships.
To keep it a viable profession however, CONCORD will let them keep the loot. So all the gankers have to do is make sure the loot is worth it, otherwise they end up losing some isk.
Imagine, you will no longer be able to gank anything you want in HIGH SEC and turn up a profit....
And also imagine... CONCORD will do more than act as a revenge squad, it will help PREVENT crimes. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
248
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 14:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
you don't see how banking works....
by the time ship is scanned it could be gone. Some gankers roll the dice the cargo is worth the concording.
This is how transport ganking usually goes for example. back before they were unscannable if you gave me a few seconds while you scanned and thought about gank or no gank, I was gone baby gone. I fit my ninjya haulers for agility just in the off chance there is an empire crew who cares enough to go "instalock" setup. Well that and I am lazy...didn't want to swap out the out of empire fit.
CCP has also established this is a viable profession. TO be fair and keep the profession viable ccp would have to go give them something. Off the op of my head it be virtually instant scanning. You don't want this. Not in a ninjya hauler you want those precious seconds to try for the escape from crews that do base their hits on value of target.
Just fly smarter. I make no claims of being perfect. I will man up and say I have been stone cold ganked in empire on my hauler char. I will also man up and say those couple of time I was flying like an idiot and some eve players taught me a lesson as to what happens in eve when you do that. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1437
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 14:38:00 -
[6] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:This will not prevent the ganks, just make it so the ganker loses some money if he does not pick a good target.
Well lets see. Freighter costs 1 billion, fine for a 10 man fleet 100 million. Cargo 2 billion, roughly half that drops (on average) so 1 billion. Isk payout, 100 million. Cost = Benefit, ganking said freighter wont happen. What you are suggesting is that ganking only be for those who carry very high value cargoes, or to put it differently you are arguing for an increase in the "safe value" of cargo (safe value being that isk value where the gank fleet is just indifferent to ganking/not ganking). It certainly will nerf freighter ganking and JFs will be right out unless they are carrying stupid cargo values (i.e. in the neighborhood of 12 billion).
So why should we do this other than to make hauling in a freighter easier?
Quote:To keep it a viable profession however, CONCORD will let them keep the loot. So all the gankers have to do is make sure the loot is worth it, otherwise they end up losing some isk.
So much for your real world metaphor.
Quote:Imagine, you will no longer be able to gank anything you want in HIGH SEC and turn up a profit....
Most people who are ganking are doing it now for profit. You are just implementing a mechanic that will allow people who use freighters to haul stuff to haul higher value cargoes with less risk. Why do you think is this necessary?
Quote:And also imagine... CONCORD will do more than act as a revenge squad, it will help PREVENT crimes.
Ship loss already acts as a preventative, you yourself have described when that preventative is not sufficient. So all you are doing is changing the point at which the preventative works...with no explanation as to why this would be a good thing in general--i.e. good for the game. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 14:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
This is not about me - i don`t own a freighter and when i have something big to move i just contract it.
This is also not just about haulers, this is about the lone miner that keeps getting ganked out of hate - his playstyle should be preserved too right?
This is also about the player doing missions and getting ganked by 10-15 destroyers because they want to loot that 200mil module he has on him. For 200 mil the destroyers even make a profit and have "fun" but nobody cares that the marauder hull he lost is 1bil+, not to mention the modules. He loses 1.3 bil, one player, not even fitting anything more expensive than his hull worth, while the TEN+ players make a profit with just a 200 mil module.
This is not balanced in any way.... but it could be.
EVE Online wants to be as close to reality as it can, and while we can`t place people in "jail" in a video game, we can at least try and give a more realistic punishment. |
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
318
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 15:01:00 -
[8] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:He loses 1.3 bil, one player, not even fitting anything more expensive than his hull worth, while the TEN+ players make a profit with just a 200 mil module.
This is not balanced in any way.... but it could be.
EVE Online wants to be as close to reality as it can, and while we can`t place people in "jail" in a video game, we can at least try and give a more realistic punishment. If you are fitting your ship "loot pinata" style - you have only yourself to blame. Dont fly something you cannot afford to lose. Also that "200mil module" may not drop. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
248
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 15:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:This is not about me - i don`t own a freighter and when i have something big to move i just contract it.
This is also not just about haulers, this is about the lone miner that keeps getting ganked out of hate - his playstyle should be preserved too right?
This is also about the player doing missions and getting ganked by 10-15 destroyers because they want to loot that 200mil module he has on him. For 200 mil the destroyers even make a profit and have "fun" but nobody cares that the marauder hull he lost is 1bil+, not to mention the modules. He loses 1.3 bil, one player, not even fitting anything more expensive than his hull worth, while the TEN+ players make a profit with just a 200 mil module.
This is not balanced in any way.... but it could be.
EVE Online wants to be as close to reality as it can, and while we can`t place people in "jail" in a video game, we can at least try and give a more realistic punishment.
and the gankers already get their hits from ccp for this.
In the case of the mission runner you are missing a key fact, RNG decides whats drops. I have had the displeasure of losing nice fit ships in pve. You run about around a 50% isn chance of gear recovery. And RNG can be cruel....you may not recover the gear you really want. Some of my cheaper fittings dropped and I was -1 nice shiny shield booster. When you hit mission runners, you hope RNG makes it worth it.
Mining is about timing and location. I sadly until realized it sucked mined for about 1.5 years on an alt. Never had any problem beyond 1 or 2 can flippers. 1 turned into a nice convo because I just had to ask does being 3 year player in pos frigate work at baiting miners. He went oh yeah.....Then I asked what would be some of the ships he'd come back in if I was dumb enough to use my kill rights. Had some nice fits so we talked about them for a bit, |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3590
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 15:05:00 -
[10] - Quote
So basically you want to punish (more so than now) the efforts of multiple people against one because the one person decides to fly something expensive but does want to take precautions?
Security lies in the hands of players. You want security? Adapt and change your habits so that you are less of a target. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
|
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 15:23:00 -
[11] - Quote
50% is 50%. If he has 400mil worth of modules on a 1bil ship it means 200 mil worth of loot will drop. And the 200 mil that drop will make the 10 people ganking that ship turn up a profit.
I say that is unfair and it should be changed so that 1 bil hulls are no longer destroyed for less that 1-2bil in fittings. One invulnerability field is 1.5 bil so it is not that uncommon to see ships fitting it.
I consider that fair considering there is nothing players can do to prevent High Sec ganking if the gankers are determined.
High Sec should not be Low Sec with a revenge mechanic, it should actually deter people from ganking everything in sight.
As you can see above, people don`t even scan the ships, they just pop everything because it is now so profitable to just kill and see if anything drops why bother actually checking to see if the ship you kill has any loot?
This should not be the case in High Sec. People should be forced to actually check if the target is worth it not just be allowed to gank ship after ship showing they do not care about any consequence as they are too small. |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1761
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 15:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:This is not about me - i don`t own a freighter and when i have something big to move i just contract it.
This is also not just about haulers, this is about the lone miner that keeps getting ganked out of hate - his playstyle should be preserved too right?
No. The reason for this is because everything that you do while mining affects my mining.
1. The rocks you mine are ones I can't. 2. The minerals you produce reduce the value of mine. 3. Therefore, you have to go.
Yeah, the rocks will spawn tomorrow ... but waiting til tomorrow means that I might miss out on some opportunity that crops up in the market (price spike, whatever). Or maybe I needed the mins real quick to finish build and it'd take less time to mine/refine than buying off a cheap order, etc.
One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1437
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:50% is 50%. If he has 400mil worth of modules on a 1bil ship it means 200 mil worth of loot will drop. And the 200 mil that drop will make the 10 people ganking that ship turn up a profit.
Redo the math please. With your suggestion the loot drop on average is 200 million. But a 1 billion isk hull was lost. Gain is now:
400 - 1,000 = -600.
With 10 guys that is a 60 million loss on top of their ship losses as well.
That guy is not perfectly safe ratting except for people who want to gank just for luls.
Under the current system they'd make 20 million each, then you'd subtract off ship losses. If they are using destroyers with t2 guns and damage modules that will likely mean a 13-15 million loss each, so a gain of 7-5 million.
And chances are the fitting that expensive module did so because he lacks the skills to fly a t2 fit which would likely work pretty much as good--i.e. the target was impatient in terms of wanting to use something he wasn't really ready to use.
Under your scheme the modules would have to be worth 2x the hull value. You just made being impatient a viable option. Why is this a good thing? Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1437
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:10:00 -
[14] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:
As you can see above, people don`t even scan the ships, they just pop everything because it is now so profitable to just kill and see if anything drops why bother actually checking to see if the ship you kill has any loot?
Funny, whenever I run missions I use a regular BS and T2 fits and almost never, ever have any issues. Here is an idea, how about not flying a bling boat, or if you must go to null where you actually have a higher degree of safety (well, if you watch intel channels, watch local, and stay aligned...and possibly use a scout). Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
248
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:16:00 -
[15] - Quote
fair and eve don't go together in same sentence. Hell fair and life don't go together either.
Here is the deal down and dirty. Empire ganks are supported by ccp as its the only real isk control that empire has in place. Empire carebears lacking ganks (or making them completely not worth doing) make isk with no overhead. This is bad for the economy.
Low sec and 0.0 have their isk faucets but they carry some overhead. I for example made 1 billion isk in less then 10 minutes when I bagged an officer spawn. 2 weeks later my alliance at the time went on a road trip and in the span of a week in securing our staging system and pushing into hostile space lost half of that in ship losses (lots of meat grinder ops...some lag deaths courtesy of black of screen of death) .
You dedicated empire bears don't have this happen. YOu don't voluntarily fly ships you know at some point will blow up to attempt to balance the isk flow. Enter ganking...if you won't complete the cycle of giving back some of the isk you made by choice, well then the game lets others make that choice for you.
Mission runner hates it that bad do what I do...run a hard to probe tengu. You have to be found to be ganked. max skill virtued pilots are not common in empire. |
supernova ranger
Dead Orbit Inc.
77
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:33:00 -
[16] - Quote
I wanna see the gankers wreck get blown up by concord after they blow up their ship but not be factored into their insurance after the fact. |
Sipphakta en Gravonere
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
358
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
supernova ranger wrote:I wanna see the gankers wreck get blown up by concord after they blow up their ship but not be factored into their insurance after the fact.
I have trouble understanding this sentence as there is no insurance payout when suicide ganking.
To the OP: That would make any JF practically ungankable, at a hull cost of 7 Bill or more, it needs to carry 14Bill in value to cover the fine alone. That is absolutely unrealistic. Also, freighter ganking isn't as common as you might think, there are less than 15 freighters exploding in ALL OF EVE on a average day - including deaths to war-decs, in low- and nullsec, in wh-space, death due to suspect flagging etc. It's hardly a common occurence. I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC. -- TheGunslinger42 "**** goons, they only kill stuff that can't shoot back, they aren't killing us fast enough, they missed my ****** Ibis so they failed, CCP ban goons they shot my ship." -- Distracted |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
427
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
"I think that we should still allow suicide ganking to happen, but it should just be prohibitively expensive so while you CAN do it, you won't WANT to, because you will have to replace the cost of your tornado, as well as being fined by CONCORD for upwards of potentially a billion ISK." |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
926
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 16:57:00 -
[19] - Quote
While I don't have any particular suggestions one way or the other, I do want to say that it's always struck me as odd that after all the training for a freighter and all the expense of buying one you can't actually carry anything significant in it unless you have a multple scouts, some webbers, 8-10 logi and a little bit of divine intervention.
Freighters being nothing more than 1b-ISK dump trucks seems somehow... wrong. Oh well, that's just EVE I suppose. |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1761
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:01:00 -
[20] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:50% is 50%. If he has 400mil worth of modules on a 1bil ship it means 200 mil worth of loot will drop. And the 200 mil that drop will make the 10 people ganking that ship turn up a profit.
No, a 1b ship carrying 400m in modules will drop anywhere from 0 to 400m in loot, because every individual item has a 50% drop chance.
Your probability of hitting your mark decreases exponentially the more modules/items you need:
1 = 0.5^1 = 0.5 = 50% 2 = 0.5^2 = 0.25 = 25% 5 = 0.5^5 = 0.03125 = 3.125% 10 = 0.5^10 = 0.00097 = 0.09%
(This looks right, but I'm likely missing something -- been ages since learning stats/probability). One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |
|
Sipphakta en Gravonere
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
358
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:02:00 -
[21] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:While I don't have any particular suggestions one way or the other, I do want to say that it's always struck me as odd that after all the training for a freighter and all the expense of buying one you can't actually carry anything significant in it unless you have a multple scouts, some webbers, 8-10 logi and a little bit of divine intervention.
Freighters being nothing more than 1b-ISK dump trucks seems somehow... wrong. Oh well, that's just EVE I suppose.
You'd only need 1 scout and 1 webber to be 95% safe. Compare that to the 15-25 people needed to scout, gank and loot your freighter and it looks very much in favor of the freighter pilot. I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC. -- TheGunslinger42 "**** goons, they only kill stuff that can't shoot back, they aren't killing us fast enough, they missed my ****** Ibis so they failed, CCP ban goons they shot my ship." -- Distracted |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:03:00 -
[22] - Quote
For jump freighters the numbers will differ i`m guessing, CCP will sort it all out.
We are discussing the idea here, the numbers will be tweaked by CCP if this is implemented.
But i think we clearly need some kind of fine. Right now we have freighters that cost 1.5bil afraid to carry more than 1 bil as they will get suicide ganked.
Not to mention smaller ships or mission ships that are afraid to use deadspace modules.
We clearly need a fine, that is my opinion.
How big should it be, i`ll let CCP decide, i will not mind if they change the values. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15641
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:13:00 -
[23] - Quote
No. Freighter suicide ganks are still rare and pilots have options already to reduce risk. Stop asking for hand holding mechanics, when you seemingly don't want to use the options CCP allow already.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
249
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:13:00 -
[24] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:While I don't have any particular suggestions one way or the other, I do want to say that it's always struck me as odd that after all the training for a freighter and all the expense of buying one you can't actually carry anything significant in it unless you have a multple scouts, some webbers, 8-10 logi and a little bit of divine intervention.
Freighters being nothing more than 1b-ISK dump trucks seems somehow... wrong. Oh well, that's just EVE I suppose.
you can try an old trick of not flying during peak hours for solo runs.
rushing to a trade hub like jita smack dab in the middle of say USTZ primetime can be not such a good idea. Generally a time when the camps are manned more heavily.
or do not use shortest route. You see gankers do the same thing most pilots do. If they want to go from rens to jita they type jita in map, see the route and follow it. If a nice .5 on the way they setup camp knowing they have a longer clock till concord shows up. Solution: don't follow this route and you avoid the gate camp.
This is why many empire peeps would probably do better in eve after a bit of time out of empire. In low sec and 0.0 you learn quick shortest route tends to lead to gate camps. Simple solution to this problem is add some twists to the path and come in through the gate not camped or bypasses that system entirely. 10 minutes more of travel time or 1 dead ship.....what hurts you more is something a player needs to decide. |
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
320
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:43:00 -
[25] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:50% is 50%. If he has 400mil worth of modules on a 1bil ship it means 200 mil worth of loot will drop. And the 200 mil that drop will make the 10 people ganking that ship turn up a profit. Lets see... Target has 20 modules 1 of which is 350mil shield booster, other modules are T2 1-2 mil each. If you kill it you get 10 modules worth of loot (on average), but Shield booster is not 1 of them (blame loot fairy). That means that gang of 10 killed a target to get 10-20mil worth of modules and lost 150mil (-recovered modules) worth of catalysts. Where is your math now? Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 17:59:00 -
[26] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Freedom Equality wrote:50% is 50%. If he has 400mil worth of modules on a 1bil ship it means 200 mil worth of loot will drop. And the 200 mil that drop will make the 10 people ganking that ship turn up a profit. Lets see... Target has 20 modules 1 of which is 350mil shield booster, other modules are T2 1-2 mil each. If you kill it you get 10 modules worth of loot (on average), but Shield booster is not 1 of them (blame loot fairy). That means that gang of 10 killed a target to get 10-20mil worth of modules and lost 150mil (-recovered modules) worth of catalysts. Where is your math now?
That is my point, ganking a 1 bil hull for a 50% chance to get a 350mil module should get you in the red ALL THE TIME.
Want to gank something, pick on a target with a deadspace invulnerability field or two. That gets you potentially 3b worth of loot. Not to mention other modules it might have.
Don`t want to wait for such a target a decide to gank everyone? Well you should be able to do it, at a cost.
|
Sipphakta en Gravonere
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
358
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 18:08:00 -
[27] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:Don`t want to wait for such a target a decide to gank everyone? Well you should be able to do it, at a cost.
Why? Looking at eve-kill, suicide ganks are a rare occurrence (understandably so, after all the nerfs this profession has encountered) - why do you want to reduce it even further? I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC. -- TheGunslinger42 "**** goons, they only kill stuff that can't shoot back, they aren't killing us fast enough, they missed my ****** Ibis so they failed, CCP ban goons they shot my ship." -- Distracted |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 18:17:00 -
[28] - Quote
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:Freedom Equality wrote:Don`t want to wait for such a target a decide to gank everyone? Well you should be able to do it, at a cost. Why? Looking at eve-kill, suicide ganks are a rare occurrence (understandably so, after all the nerfs this profession has encountered) - why do you want to reduce it even further?
Because people are using disposable ships and lose almost no ISK to gank unsuspecting targets that have no way to defend themselves. The gankers take NO risk while killing ships that are worth 10x times what the gankers bring.
EVE is about risk. There is no risk for the gankers they are just trading crappy destroyers they don`t mind losing to kill ships worth 1+bil for just the hull, not to mention cargo/fit.
Right now the person getting ganked is taking all the risk and losing the most. |
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
320
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 18:23:00 -
[29] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote: That is my point, ganking a 1 bil hull for a 50% chance to get a 350mil module should get you in the red ALL THE TIME.
Why should i go negative if target failed at protecting / properly tanking their ship? Why should i pay for others' mistakes? Also have you tried to to gather 10-man suicide gang for possible 5-10mil profit with a good chance to go negative or gank fail? Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |
Sipphakta en Gravonere
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
358
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 18:30:00 -
[30] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:Because people are using disposable ships and lose almost no ISK to gank unsuspecting targets that have no way to defend themselves. The gankers take NO risk while killing ships that are worth 10x times what the gankers bring.
If that were true, you'd see a lot more suicide ganks of freighters and mission runners. Ganking is extremely rare, there is no need to further decrease the viability of this profession.
Quote:EVE is about risk. There is no risk for the gankers they are just trading crappy destroyers they don`t mind losing to kill ships worth 1+bil for just the hull, not to mention cargo/fit.
Right now the person getting ganked is taking all the risk and losing the most.
Wait, what? Ganking is hardly a risk-free profession:
- Not all ganks succeed - Due to looting mechanics, every single person in eve (well, on that grid) can prevent the gankers from scooping the loot. - When using catalysts to gank, gankers are extremely vulnerable to hostile ECM. A single griffin can jam out 2-3 catalysts. - A criminal (gankers) or suspect (looter) flag means one can get podded by everybody in Eve. - Gankers have to keep their security status up, either by ratting or by paying somebody to hunt for tags (if they don't they are fair game for everybody)
If you decide to fly around with a blinged out mission-ship, you should take necessary action to protect your assets (logistics, ECM, scouts, ...) I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC. -- TheGunslinger42 "**** goons, they only kill stuff that can't shoot back, they aren't killing us fast enough, they missed my ****** Ibis so they failed, CCP ban goons they shot my ship." -- Distracted |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |