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) |
Aldanar Vorlax
Viziam Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 10:36:00 -
[211] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk?
Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?. Also there's tags for getting sec status back now so its become even easier now to gank.
Sec status getting low? turn in some tags and keep on ganking! Wheres the risk or consequences if there easy to get around with little effort?
My only other thought is adjust insurance so that those that lose their T2 or pirate hulls get their cost back in insurance when killed illegally ie suicide ganking. That way insurance still wouldn't pay out on those hulls when used in legal combat.
A) the player only loses out on module/cargo cost B) gankers still profit as well as they currently do C) insurance balance remains intact |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 10:55:00 -
[212] - Quote
Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. What id propose is make Security Status more useful.
I really like your ideas personally i like the Sec Status one as it would give players a way to realistically defend themselfs by using a tank(if a tank can be used on the ship) and keeping a high Security Status.
We will see that CCP think of them! |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 11:02:00 -
[213] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Still waiting for those numbers.
Also if it's so easy and profitable, then why are suicide ganks so rare? Are you running out of good questions so you keep asking what was already answered? :-)
What i said before should convince you that even the big Hauling Corporations carry less as they know they will get ganked otherwise.
Also,if you would bother doing a search, there are a lot of people complaining about Suicide Ganking, you will even find NEW PLAYERS say they were Suicide Ganked for fun after they just managed to get their ship and have no way to get another one.
Freedom Equality wrote: They came here suggesting you use a logistic alt/use friends when moving a freighter and so on while claiming they have little to no impact....
But my question is, if there are so few ganks and people can avoid them so easily, why does Red Frog Freight limit its value per freighter to 1 bil? Why everyone on the forums advises mission runners not to fit deadspace modules as they will get Suicide Ganked?
Truth is, Suicide Ganking has a very real and noticeable effect in EVE. No matter what the Suicide Gankers want you to think.
|
Gimme more Cynos
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
79
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 11:04:00 -
[214] - Quote
The only thing wrong with ganking is that freighters can't be fitted, so freighter pilots can't choose between cargo space, safety and/or speed.
|
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
326
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 12:23:00 -
[215] - Quote
Aldanar Vorlax wrote:Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk? Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?. Also there's tags for getting sec status back now so its become even easier now to gank. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3820405#post3820405 Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |
Aldanar Vorlax
Viziam Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 12:52:00 -
[216] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk? Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?. Also there's tags for getting sec status back now so its become even easier now to gank. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3820405#post3820405
I take your point but your argument 'he has lost nothing' is wrong considering that person will for a typical pirate/T2 mission ship will have to fork out 900Mil - 1 bil for a new ship + whatever new modules.
Im in favour of ganking however the risk or the ganker is far lower and unbalanced especially when to take into account your participating in illegal combat. Again why should players have to loose huge amounts of isk to illegal combat AND unable to defended themselves?. Also what risk are you at if your ganking?
Problem is ganking has got easier, cheaper and its easier to repair you sec loss. |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1764
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 13:23:00 -
[217] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:You should be able to do it for profit. Absolutely.
However, trading your 15mil ship(and you get some money back via insurance and half of your modules back) for a cool 50-100mil profit, is too much.
Haven't read any farther yet, but saw this gem.
Losing insurance wrote:
Your insurance will be lost if you do any of the following:
Repackage your ship Trade your ship to another player Put your ship into a corporation hangar Sell your ship on the market Put your ship inside a contract. Suicide attack someone in High-Sec (players destroyed by CONCORD do not receive an insurance payout).
source (emphasis mine)
Freedom Equality wrote: You also take no risk and if you fail a gank you recover fast. The victim gains nothing, loses 1 to 1.5bil for the hull + at least one more bil for the cargo/modules. The victim will not recover fast.
I think that it should not be so profitable to inflict as much ISK damage to a single person in High Sec while taking no risk.(losing your ship is intended and you have no problem with it so no that is not a risk)
Why do you think you should be able to cause 3bil+ ISK damage per person for the enemy for only 10-15mil damage per person to yourself(totaling max 100-150 mil damage to your entire group) in High Security Space at no risk and get rich while doing it?
Because the gankers are flying with friends. Did a run once through Hek with a full load of gallente ice to make bank on the goons oxytope interdiction...
... had three guardians, two falcons, two webbing inties, and several scouts the whole damn way ... was the entire corp getting in on the move ... granted this impacted the corp profits by half (because *GASP* paid my people) ... but was a good time.
edit - damn, no links in quote subjects 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 |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15653
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 13:48:00 -
[218] - Quote
Aldanar Vorlax wrote:Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk? Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. If this is the case, why is it so rare?
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 13:53:00 -
[219] - Quote
yes yes i forgot the removed insurance for ships killed by CONCORD we are all humans and make mistakes. It does not change anything, they still risk too little and gain too much.
The issue is that a Suicide Ganker can use a lovely 15mil ship(and get half the fit back) so his loss per person is at most 15mil.
A hauler loses 1bil + cargo, a level 4 mission ship(pirate/marauder) is again a lot of ISK.
So when a Suicide Ganker fails a gank he does not care. His loss is 15mil. And he is doing an illegal action.
When a hauler/mission ship gets ganked he cares. A lot. As he will need a lot of time to recover.
It would only be normal for a mechanic to be introduced so on ocasion... the suicide ganker ends up losing a few bilion. Not always, not often, but sometimes.
Then they would risk as much as everyone else and all would be fine in the world.
|
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1764
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 13:54:00 -
[220] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk?
This.
TBH, I think the problem is that CONCORD is "too powerful" right now.
On one side, you have the people thinking of them as a "protection force" (because assured ship destruction).
On the other side, you have the people thinking of them as "in the way" -- they'd love to have an active defense fleet able to stomp all over an incoming gank attempt from anyone (and not just the -5/10 guys who are freely shootable anyway) ... but can't in hisec (I know -- go to low).
Lowsec is good and all, but *because* CONCORD is so damn OP in hisec, there is a "wall" for many people that they have to get over/through ... and really, it's not a good place for a 3-5 man mining fleet. Once calculated it out, and for a "proper" lowsec mining op in a deadend system, you need like a minimum of 7 people (3x miner, 1x hauler, 1x Orca (Rorqual), 1x eyes on the gate, 1x falcon) 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 |
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15653
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 13:59:00 -
[221] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:Mag's wrote:Still waiting for those numbers.
Also if it's so easy and profitable, then why are suicide ganks so rare? Are you running out of good questions so you keep asking what was already answered? :-) What i said before should convince you that even the big Hauling Corporations carry less as they know they will get ganked otherwise. Also,if you would bother doing a search, there are a lot of people complaining about Suicide Ganking, you will even find NEW PLAYERS say they were Suicide Ganked for fun after they just managed to get their ship and have no way to get another one. Because you are making it up as you go along. One minute it isn't rare, the next it is. I also asked you to provide us with the data to back up your early assertion that it wasn't rare. But you keep avoiding it.
The joke is people obviously are smarter than you take them for. By mitigating the risk and therefore making it a rare event. But as it took 4 rounds of censorship on your posts, before you stopped with the ridiculous and abhorrent real life comparisons, I'm not surprised.
Oh and mitigating risk, doesn't just involve reducing the value of the cargo you haul. It is also about using the tools provided and playing with friends. This is after all, an MMO.
So we still await these numbers and while you are at it, could provide citation that was asked for in post 163 and 169?
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:02:00 -
[222] - Quote
Mag's wrote: If this is the case, why is it so rare?
Asking the same question over and over just because you do not like the answer does not mean you will get a new answer next time. Most of us learn this as children but it is never too late.
Freedom Equality wrote:Mag's wrote:Still waiting for those numbers.
Also if it's so easy and profitable, then why are suicide ganks so rare? Are you running out of good questions so you keep asking what was already answered? :-) What i said before should convince you that even the big Hauling Corporations carry less as they know they will get ganked otherwise. Also,if you would bother doing a search, there are a lot of people complaining about Suicide Ganking, you will even find NEW PLAYERS say they were Suicide Ganked for fun after they just managed to get their ship and have no way to get another one. Freedom Equality wrote: They came here suggesting you use a logistic alt/use friends when moving a freighter and so on while claiming they have little to no impact....
But my question is, if there are so few ganks and people can avoid them so easily, why does Red Frog Freight limit its value per freighter to 1 bil? Why everyone on the forums advises mission runners not to fit deadspace modules as they will get Suicide Ganked?
Truth is, Suicide Ganking has a very real and noticeable effect in EVE. No matter what the Suicide Gankers want you to think.
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15653
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:18:00 -
[223] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:Mag's wrote: If this is the case, why is it so rare?
Asking the same question over and over just because you do not like the answer does not mean you will get a new answer next time. Most of us learn this as children but it is never too late. Yes I have already said people mitigate the risk. But not just by reducing the value of their cargo. Red Frog also have other parts to their group with different rules. You could always let us know what they are. But all this proves is that their business model for fred frog, is for lone freighter transport with little input. Are you now suggesting that this should be possible without risk mitigation?
But we are not simply talking about freighters here are we? Or has that fact conveniently skipped your mind? You claimed marauders and mining barge suicide ganks are also not rare. These are the numbers I have continually asked you for. The numbers you have continually avoided providing, as well as the citations asked for by another poster.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
579
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:18:00 -
[224] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:Mag's wrote: If this is the case, why is it so rare?
Asking the same question over and over just because you do not like the answer does not mean you will get a new answer next time. Most of us learn this as children but it is never too late. Freedom Equality wrote:Mag's wrote:Still waiting for those numbers.
Also if it's so easy and profitable, then why are suicide ganks so rare? Are you running out of good questions so you keep asking what was already answered? :-) What i said before should convince you that even the big Hauling Corporations carry less as they know they will get ganked otherwise. Also,if you would bother doing a search, there are a lot of people complaining about Suicide Ganking, you will even find NEW PLAYERS say they were Suicide Ganked for fun after they just managed to get their ship and have no way to get another one. Freedom Equality wrote: They came here suggesting you use a logistic alt/use friends when moving a freighter and so on while claiming they have little to no impact....
But my question is, if there are so few ganks and people can avoid them so easily, why does Red Frog Freight limit its value per freighter to 1 bil? Why everyone on the forums advises mission runners not to fit deadspace modules as they will get Suicide Ganked?
Truth is, Suicide Ganking has a very real and noticeable effect in EVE. No matter what the Suicide Gankers want you to think.
You haven't provided any numbers, you're just stomping your feet and screaming the same thing over and over but getting progressively louder and less coherent each time.
We want NUMBERS, as in how many ships get ganked per day/week/month (pick one). Preferably with links to killboards to show that you aren't just making them up. |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1766
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:33:00 -
[225] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote: The issue is that a Suicide Ganker can use a lovely 15mil ship(and get half the fit back) so his loss per person is at most 15mil.
Not necessarily. It'll be "half the fit" in the long run -- but over the course of a small sample of ganks (say 100) the numbers may be lower (or higher, because you have a non-zero chance of getting all the modules, same as none of the modules).
pulling from random.org, did a quick sample of 10 possible drop scenarios (with 10 modules)
1 = drop 0 = destroyed
Each column is a ship ________________________________ 1|1|0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0 1|0|0|0|1|1|0|0|1|1 1|0|0|0|1|1|0|1|1|1 0|0|0|1|0|1|1|0|1|0 0|1|1|0|0|0|1|1|1|1 0|0|1|1|0|0|1|1|1|1 1|1|1|1|1|1|0|0|0|0 1|1|1|1|1|1|0|1|0|0 1|0|0|1|0|1|0|1|1|1 0|0|0|1|0|0|1|1|0|1 ________________ 6, 4, 4, 7, 4, 6, 5, 6, 6, 6 => 54% of the modules dropped
Next set: _______________ 1|0|1|1|0|0|1|0|1|1 0|1|1|0|0|0|0|1|1|1 1|1|0|0|0|0|0|1|0|1 1|1|0|0|0|0|1|0|1|1 1|1|0|0|0|1|0|0|0|0 1|1|0|0|0|1|1|1|0|1 0|1|0|0|1|1|0|1|0|1 1|1|1|0|0|0|1|1|0|0 0|0|1|0|1|1|0|1|0|0 0|0|0|1|0|0|0|0|0|0 ________________
6, 7, 4, 2, 2, 4, 4, 6, 3, 6 = 44% of the modules dropped.
Our simulated ganker has only gotten 49% of the possible modules to drop (98/200). Obviously, this is an EXTREMELY limited set, and has no real statistical relevance. I could run say 1000 samples to get a better set, but why should I do the work for you 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 |
Frozen Chief
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:49:00 -
[226] - Quote
Adding the ability to buy sec status is part of the issue...
I dont know if I agree with the OP, although I dont disagree either. I think a better solution though is to increase security status hit, and then actually BAN them from hi-sec. If you are -5 or below lets say, you cannot jump through into hi-sec at all. Period.
You also cannot buy security tags so gotta work in low-sec to redeem yourself.
This makes people pick their ganking targets, people will still gank a 5 billion cargo holding freighter because by the time their sec status is too low, they've done that 5 times making 2.5 billion each. Id sit in low grinding standings for a few hours for that, as would most gankers. |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:57:00 -
[227] - Quote
You can always hire someone to provide exact numbers if you want them, or just do the work yourself. Don`t be lazy.
The fact that the entire EVE population is moving around like they are sure they will get ganked if they make it profitable for the gankers to do it if proof enough that this has a big impact.
Besides, some of you admitted you are Suicide Gankers, so you know how it is... no risk, trade a 15mil ship for a clean 50-100mil profit.
As for your claim that "bo hoo people should not fly the ship if they can`t afford to lose it", it is very easy to make when you are in a 15mil destroyer killing ships worth billions. As you lose 15mil they lose bilions.
But when we try and find a way for you to occasionally lose as much as your victims do you come here crying and doing anything and everything possible to prevent that.
No my dear friend, if you want the exact numbers get them for yourself, they matter very little. The proof that Suicide Ganking has an impact is in how EVE High Sec haulers have reduced their cargo value up to a point where they fly with an almost empty cargo OR are afraid to use deadspace items. Because they know they will get ganked, as the Suicide Gankers have no risk, while the brave haulers/missioneers/miners risk a lot of ISK every time they undock.
It is about time to get the Suicide Gankers to risk as much ISK as their victim, considering the Suicide Gankers are doing the illegal action here.
You can keep trying to derail this and ask for information you can get yourself, but are not willing to do the work, i am here and i say it will not work. I will keep showing people how you risk so little and gain so much. You can hate me all you want, that will not change the truth. |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1766
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 14:59:00 -
[228] - Quote
trouble with this is that there's not a way to get from (say) Aridia to (say) Black Rise staying in lowsec only. or, hell, a lowsec island in the middle of (say) Everyshore to anywhere useful.
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 |
Rhianna Ghost
Eat My Shorts Inc. Suicide-Commando
46
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:00:00 -
[229] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:
But my question is, if there are so few ganks and people can avoid them so easily, why does Red Frog Freight limit its value per freighter to 1 bil? Why everyone on the forums advises mission runners not to fit deadspace modules as they will get Suicide Ganked?
Maybe, because they have pay the collateral? Maybe, because they know how NOT getting printed GANK ME onto the hull? Maybe, because they know their ****?
I am no ganker, for sure (as you might see by my Sec Standing...). I am owning a freighter and using it occasionally, but mostly I am doing other things in game.
The OP has told us multiple times (not forums citing here, otherwise it would be to many citations, but its all him):
Post 105: "I think that it should not be so profitable ..."
Post 122: "But i believe ... "
Post 127: "I also think nobody should be able to ... "
Post 129: "... but i still think ..."
So the Op is clearly stating his opinion here. Everyone is allowed to have one. And an opinion does not need any facts to support it. So maybe he does not have any.
Freedom Equality wrote:Truth is, Suicide Ganking has a very real and noticeable effect in EVE. No matter what the Suicide Gankers want you to think.
Why in the name of the imagined Amarrian Gods should they NOT have an effect? It is a single shard MMO with real consequences. Every action may or may not affect the bigger picture. And I am flying around with my freighter, with my mining barges, with my incursion ships and I have not been ganked up to now.
Maybe, because I am not asking for it, with stupid blingy fits or afk flying or maybe I am just lucky, but still...
Risk vs. Reward. I am risking every ship I undock to be lost to gankers. They risk the wrath of the loot fairy. Or the one looting faster than they are. Or the stupid guy in fleet, who forgot to switch securtiy to red. Or the bad weather in Niaja. So be it.
This is EVE.
*plonk |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:04:00 -
[230] - Quote
Frozen Chief wrote:Adding the ability to buy sec status is part of the issue...
I dont know if I agree with the OP, although I dont disagree either. I think a better solution though is to increase security status hit, and then actually BAN them from hi-sec. If you are -5 or below lets say, you cannot jump through into hi-sec at all. Period.
You also cannot buy security tags so gotta work in low-sec to redeem yourself.
This makes people pick their ganking targets, people will still gank a 5 billion cargo holding freighter because by the time their sec status is too low, they've done that 5 times making 2.5 billion each. Id sit in low grinding standings for a few hours for that, as would most gankers.
I am not trying to force my idea, i would be happy with any other idea as long as something is done so that the Suicide Gankers stand to lose as much as their victim. Even then, their loss will be shared so they will take a much smaller ISK loss per person compared to their victim, but at least it would be possible for them to actually LOSE ISK and not recover with the next successful gank.
I welcome any idea that can change that. Post it here and let it be known. Together we will find something that works. |
|
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
579
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:12:00 -
[231] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:You can always hire someone to provide exact numbers if you want them, or just do the work yourself. Don`t be lazy.
. You're the one making the claims, the burden of proof is on you. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8415
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:18:00 -
[232] - Quote
Aldanar Vorlax wrote:Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk? Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?.
You forgot a few things.
Ganker is open to attack from everyone Ganker can fail to kill the target Ganker faces a 50% chance of loot not dropping at all Ganker will be hit with a sec status loss resulting in being open to attack from everyone Ganker will be locked out of a ship for 15 min Ganker will have a killright against them that is sellable and can be activated at any time Gankers loot ship may be attacked Gankers loot may be stolen by someone else Gankers fly ships that are ironically profitable to gank Gankers void their ship insurance.
The only reason it is easy is because the victim makes it easy. |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1766
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:21:00 -
[233] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote: I am not trying to force my idea, i would be happy with any other idea as long as something is done so that the Suicide Gankers stand to lose as much as their victim. Even then, their loss will be shared so they will take a much smaller ISK loss per person compared to their victim, but at least it would be possible for them to actually LOSE ISK and not recover with the next successful gank.
I welcome any idea that can change that. Post it here and let it be known. Together we will find something that works.
Nerf CONCORD, Buff flying with fleets.
I hate pulling out RL examples, but consider a container freighter on the Earths tradelanes ... some small group of dudes (say 5) in a ******* $500 ROWBOAT can take over a multi-billion-dollar vessel carrying tens of billions of dollars worth of cargo. And that's not even a WARSHIP.
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 |
Velicitia
Emergent Avionics
1766
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:22:00 -
[234] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk? Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?. You forgot a few things. Ganker is open to attack from everyone Ganker can fail to kill the target Ganker faces a 50% chance of loot not dropping at all Ganker will be hit with a sec status loss resulting in being open to attack from everyone Ganker will be locked out of a ship for 15 min Ganker will have a killright against them that is sellable and can be activated at any time Gankers loot ship may be attacked Gankers loot may be stolen by someone else Gankers fly ships that are ironically profitable to gank Gankers void their ship insurance. The only reason it is easy is because the victim makes it easy.
Ganker risks their pod because some ******* sitting in the belt with an insta-locking inty... 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 |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
580
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:27:00 -
[235] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:Mag's wrote:Aldanar Vorlax wrote:I'll throw in a curve ball suggestion here which in theory could add some additional risk for the gankers. Why do they need additional risk? Because its far too simple and easy to do with current mechanics. Why should the players getting ganked suffer far greater consequences (ie significant isk loss) than the gankers who loose a cheap hull and profit from your modules?. You forgot a few things. Ganker is open to attack from everyone Ganker can fail to kill the target Ganker faces a 50% chance of loot not dropping at all Ganker will be hit with a sec status loss resulting in being open to attack from everyone Ganker will be locked out of a ship for 15 min Ganker will have a killright against them that is sellable and can be activated at any time Gankers loot ship may be attacked Gankers loot may be stolen by someone else Gankers fly ships that are ironically profitable to gank Gankers void their ship insurance. The only reason it is easy is because the victim makes it easy. You also left out the part where the gankers accidentally kill the wrong target. (I've seen it happen) |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:39:00 -
[236] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:Freedom Equality wrote:You can always hire someone to provide exact numbers if you want them, or just do the work yourself. Don`t be lazy.
. You're the one making the claims, the burden of proof is on you.
I claimed Suicide Gankers risk 15mil and get 50-100 mil profit. If you read carefully, it was a Suicide Ganker that provided the numbers.
I claimed Suicide Gankers take no risk as you can`t realistically gank them and get away with it besides even if they did they would not care as the ratio is 1 successful gank = 5 or more failed ones.
I claimed that the Suicide Gankers lose 15mil per person while the victim loses 1bil+ per person.
People claimed it is rare and has no effect. Not me. I claimed it has an impact that can be seen everywhere in High Sec as everyone takes Suicide Ganking into account. Now if it is that rare and has no impact, how come everyone from the little guy to the freight corporation knows about it and takes it into account?
My claim is that in its current state, it has a big impact. And the risk the Suicide Ganker takes(monetary risk) is too small and they simply can`t lose with 1 win needed to cover 5 or more losses.
The problem here is risk versus reward. A Suicide Ganker stands to lose 15mil while having total control over who and when he attacks. The victim stands to lose 1.5+bil while unable to do much as the Suicide Gankers have time to scan the ship and decide what type of damage to use and how much damage is needed.
So we have one side that has total control and can strike anytime/anyone while standing to lose 15mil per person and the other side that can`t avoid a good gank(as it doesn`t know when it will happen/can`t be guarded 24/7 while missioning and even if it has friends in the system they will not make it in time, as for freighters they HP is fixed so once you killed one you know how much damage is needed - not like it can MWD and cause tracking problems). The side that can`t avoid the gank loses from 1 bil up to 3bil or more.
But when we ask for the gankers to risk as much and stand to lose the same number of ISK per person they come here saying that is too much. For them. But it is ok for them if someone else loses that much. |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:44:00 -
[237] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:Freedom Equality wrote: I am not trying to force my idea, i would be happy with any other idea as long as something is done so that the Suicide Gankers stand to lose as much as their victim. Even then, their loss will be shared so they will take a much smaller ISK loss per person compared to their victim, but at least it would be possible for them to actually LOSE ISK and not recover with the next successful gank.
I welcome any idea that can change that. Post it here and let it be known. Together we will find something that works.
Nerf CONCORD, Buff flying with fleets. I hate pulling out RL examples, but consider a container freighter on the Earths tradelanes ... some small group of dudes (say 5) in a ******* $500 ROWBOAT can take over a multi-billion-dollar vessel carrying tens of billions of dollars worth of cargo. And that's not even a WARSHIP.
Agreed. But they actually risk their life. And it only takes one failed attempt to get them in jail for the rest of their life.
In EVE, the Suicide Gankers use $500 rowboats to destroy freighters, but while they get half the cargo and destroy the freighter, they can`t be caught. The worst thing that can happen is that they lose their $500 rowboat.
I would say it is not the same thing. |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
580
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 15:55:00 -
[238] - Quote
Freedom Equality wrote:
The victim stands to lose 1.5+bil while unable to do much as the Suicide Gankers have time to scan the ship and decide what type of damage to use and how much damage is needed.
Only if the victim is stupid and makes it easy to do.
Also no one is going to gank a 1.5 bill freighter and make a profit.
Really you should just stop playing EVE because everything in your argument is complaining about the core aspects of EVE.
1) dumb people stand to lose a lot from people smarter than them
2) plans work better with more people (and losses don't hurt as much)
And you can drop the "risk reward" bullshit. If you want risk reward then you better get going on nerfing incursions, missions, fw plexing (I've been griding FW plexes for MONTHS and haven't had a single kill or lost a ship at all yet, all while making more money in a week than these gankers make in a month)
Fact is you don't want "risk reward" you've got your panties in a bunch over "muh fewlings" because someone lost their stupid ship. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1442
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 16:11:00 -
[239] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Evei Shard wrote:
Gankers have wanted the best of both worlds for *years*. Constantly clamoring for Miners to be forced into player corps, never once stating they themselves should be brought under the same rules. So now that someone is suggesting something different, suddenly fairness is the big issue?
Oh, and I apparently had corp management trained. Feel free to dec me. At least you'll have to be in a player corp to do it.
All we want is for the bears such as yourself to fit a tank and stop calling on CCP for just one more nerf.
OMG this! This, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this.
If you guys would just fit a tank, much of your problems would go away. Heck you don't even have to do this if you really, really don't want too. But at least realize that EVERYTHING in Eve comes with a trade off. Don't fit a tank, more vulnerable to a suicide gank. Do fit a tank, less mining output. Play solo, you are more vulnerable as you wont have friends to help you (provide boosts, maybe logistics support, etc.). Heck even think outside the damn box, fit a skiff with a tank and a scram and then gank the gankers.
I have seen war dec corps paralyze High Sec corps where the war dec corp has 3-10 guys (say 5 on average) and the other corp 25-50 pilots, say an average of 35 pilots. That is a 7:1 ratio, the decced corp could put 2-3x the number of pilots of the field. But the high sec corps don't do any of the following:
1. Wont train skills so everyone can fly a consistent and cogent fleet doctrine. 2. Wont train skills to fit ships correctly (AWU 5 is an awesome skill, pain to train, but when done...awesome). 3. Are almost afraid to lose a ship, hello this is Eve Online, loosing a ship once in a while is mandatory if you log in and undock. Get used to it. 4. Listen to whomever is in charge of you fleet and do what they tell you to do. 5. Have combat ships on-hand. 6. When you get decced meet in a given system. Numbers is ALWAYS a force multiplier.
Then coming and raging on the forums like a bunch of pansies...why you just feed into the war dec corps and suicide gankers. They just think, "This is awesome, look at them complaining and whining!" And here is an idea...gank them right back. They are in catalysts for the love of God. Get in a catalyst and go shoot them! |
Freedom Equality
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 16:14:00 -
[240] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:Freedom Equality wrote:
The victim stands to lose 1.5+bil while unable to do much as the Suicide Gankers have time to scan the ship and decide what type of damage to use and how much damage is needed.
Only if the victim is stupid and makes it easy to do. Also no one is going to gank a 1.5 bill freighter and make a profit. Really you should just stop playing EVE because everything in your argument is complaining about the core aspects of EVE. 1) dumb people stand to lose a lot from people smarter than them 2) plans work better with more people (and losses don't hurt as much) And you can drop the "risk reward" bullshit. If you want risk reward then you better get going on nerfing incursions, missions, fw plexing (I've been griding FW plexes for MONTHS and haven't had a single kill or lost a ship at all yet, all while making more money in a week than these gankers make in a month) Fact is you don't want "risk reward" you've got your panties in a bunch over "muh fewlings" because someone lost their stupid ship.
20x destroyers = 300mil fully fitted for gank. If they get half their fit back(and they usually do) the cost is now 200mil (numbers provided in this thread by Suicide Gankers, so they should know what they are talking about)
Now a freighter hull is 1bil up to 1.5bil. Just the hull. Then some cargo say 1bil and you get a 2bil-2.5bil loss for the victim.
The minimum amount needed for the gank to break even = 400ish mil in the freighter`s cargo. With a 1bil in the freighter cargo the Suicide Gankers risk 10mil per person(after the fit is recovered) while causing the Victim a 2bil-2.5bil ISK loss and gaining 40mil per person.
Battleship ganks take less destroyers(10 are enough) as they have a lot less HP(and no mission ship is buffer tanked) and only manage to get a few boosts off before they explode.
When i said 1.5bil+ i wasn`t talking about freighters alone, a pirate ship fitting some deadspace modules can only be worth 1.5bil, but it can be taken out with 10 destroyers for a nice profit.
All this in Secure Space with the guys doing the infraction earning the most while the victim loses a lot more than all 10 or 20 attackers combined.
But as you can see when the Suicide Gankers see someone trying to add some risk so they might end up losing some ISK and not always make a profit, they come here and say they actually stand to lose the most. What can i say.... LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |