EVE Search - Is suicide ganking getting out of control?

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

Is suicide ganking getting out of control?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
dpidcoe Gallente Incura	Posted - 2010.01.17 22:31:00 - [31] Edited by: dpidcoe on 17/01/2010 22:31:14 Originally by: Zill You cant tank a Hulk its a definite kill.Both my Hulks are tanked for rats in 0.0 an while they do a good job, they cant hold out against players. That's because tanking for NPCs is a lot different than tanking players. A pvp tank doesn't work so great for pve and a pve tank sucks for pvp (in most cases). A pve tank is optimized to repel a small amount of constant damage indefinitely, while a pvp tank needs to repel large amounts of damage but only for a short time. If you want to repel suicide ganks, you need to fit for a maximum amount of EHP buffer. If you want to repel 0.0 rats, you need to fit for maximum amount of regen. Also, I'm still waiting for you to come hunt me down with a 100 man blob edit: page 2 snipah! -----------------------------------------
SunGod RA Endless Destruction	Posted - 2010.01.17 22:48:00 - [32] Originally by: Zill My SOUL PROBLEM with hulka is the fact they targeted Day 1's in 1.0 an they know they did. mmhmm, ye. all them day 1's, fresh out of the oven, already trained for exhumers (you did notice the latest event was mostly exhumer-focused, right?), t2 strip miners/crystals, rigs, the whole gammut, and able to afford all that stuff. i swear, new players have it so easy these days! and it's not like they had advanced notice and could prepare themselves or anything, i mean if the venerable overseers at Crowd Control Productions really wanted to protect the poor defenseless but courageous deepspace miners, they could have easily done something, for example, i dunno, like, say, completely hypothetical and abstract idea here, putting up a news item clearly visible to all players during the login procedure. now now, i understand that some people wouldn't even bother to read the news item, so anxious they are to log in and tear down some veldspar asteroids that their hands and in fact their whole body is shaking with unabatted excitement, severely hampering their already overstretched reading-comprehension cerebral nodules, so it would not be a perfect solution should such a solution ever be implemented in a near or distant future, but there is sadly no known cure to the dreaded veldspar fever, if not MOAR VELDSPAR!!! as for insurance, seeing how cheap and effective gank-destroyers are, i doubt it would put any stop to the wanton shameless systematic and gratuitous spaceboat destruction. _
Germaldi's Mum	Posted - 2010.01.18 00:51:00 - [33] why is it always miners that get the s****y end of the stick all the time? fact is there are alot of macros are in 0.0 RATTING and even HAULING in empire there are alot of hauler & ninja salvager macros WAY more the miner macros. why not do suicide ganking of the ninja salvagers or macro ratters / mission runners?
Sue MeiWydoncha Caldari DineNdash Salvage	Posted - 2010.01.18 01:07:00 - [34] You're wrong kernal sander's, a industrial can fight how dare you imply that a iteron is a FREE KILL. I killed a Badger today that was stealing my garbage..... thank god I took it out before it learned how to Cargo Tank.... Thats right CARGO TANKING is when an Industrial gets such a huge Cargo Hold that the projectiles just ricochet arround forever in there.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 01:23:00 - [35] Originally by: Grunanca How can you say lesson learned and then state you flew afk the second time (contradiction anyone?)? The lesson is simple really: DONT FLY AFK! If you are there and see the scan mecanism on you, warp to nearest station and dock, do not go through the gate as there will be people waiting for you on the other side. No your not understanding..lesson learnt about not tanking my hauler is what I meant. I thought at the time it was possible to tank haulers. As to the AFK part. i kinda have no choice. i am not afk at the time (usually) but i only have 1 screen so have to alt-tab. usually while i'm busy blowing stuff up with my main my other account will also be working... The thing about it being out of control refers to suicide gankers ganking everything and anything no matter the value of the cargo
Zoe Midoru Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2010.01.18 02:52:00 - [36] Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk First time i was afk flying un-tanked (1MSE) and i got suicided for 20m isk worth of ammo. The suicider said he was just bored..fair enough.. learned my lesson..always afk with more tank.. I'd say that the real issue here is that suicide ganking is getting risk-free and cost-free enough that people are doing it 'because they're bored'. As a high-intensity, high-risk way of making a living, I dislike suicide ganking, but I can live with it. When it leaves the realm of a business preposition and becomes just another way to grief, the cost-reward balance needs to change. If I were going to drag one of my personal soapboxes into this, I'd say that this is just another example of how EVE's economy is much more broken than people seem to think it is.
Ekon Bor Amarr Van Diemen's Demise	Posted - 2010.01.18 03:26:00 - [37] Originally by: Sister Tisiphone ...Me, I'm getting ready to finally dip my toes into lo sec in a while - but that's my choice. Take that choice away from a lot of people and they simply will not pay for what they did not choose.... Rather off topic, but why do people feel the need to "get ready to dip their toes into lowsec in a while". It's not nullsec, 25 jumps away from Empire with bubble gatecamps in between and all the logistical nightmares that implies. It's lowsec. You don't "get ready" as part of a major plan, you buy a couple of rifters and go shoot things and get shot at, don't you? As long as your sec rating doesn't get truly awful, you just leave when you need to. I'm just curious because it always struck me as kind of odd that people see it as needing prep time. Speaking as a truly awful pvp'er, that is.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 03:36:00 - [38] Im guessing they mean prep before taking up pvp. For me that just involved saving enough isk, building enough ships and purchasing all the mods so that i dont have to do anything but pvp for a long time (on my main anyway). Mind you i still dont see the attraction of low-sec, the place is always empty.
Dec3mber NQX Innovations HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2010.01.18 04:27:00 - [39] Originally by: Trvaeler *Edited to summarize point of this whole post: Soon, suicide ganking in highsec will be made impossible and anyone in highsec will be 100% safe from everything, including scamming. Don't believe me? Just wait :) So here's what I did. I started paying money to play a game. But then I found out that I didn't really like the game play that the developers created. So what I did was I canceled my subscriptions and found another game that had a set of mechanics that I liked and I was happy playing that game. Oh wait no I didn't. I continued to pay money to play a game I didn't like and complained on the forums in the hopes that the developers would cater to my specific play style. Yeah. That seems like a much better idea.
RougeOperator	Posted - 2010.01.18 04:42:00 - [40] We should all practice Safe consensual PvP in the missionary position.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 07:29:00 - [41] Well you know what it says in the bible about soddomy. All those lube toting suicide gankers will have there own special place in hell
Douglasfeng Caldari Antares Shipyards Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2010.01.18 09:23:00 - [42] Edited by: Douglasfeng on 18/01/2010 09:23:23 Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk Well you know what it says in the bible about soddomy. All those lube toting suicide gankers will have there own special place in hell QQ, Locator Agent ACTIVATE! Cya soon these tears are so juicy i want my share
Jojo Redana	Posted - 2010.01.18 09:54:00 - [43] Originally by: Pater Peccavi There is no non-consensual PvP in EVE. Once you have created an account, you have consented to PvP. It's a cold, harsh universe out there, and that's how CCP meant it to be. Btw. it's not that harsh when you're docked.
Relettov	Posted - 2010.01.18 09:55:00 - [44] Originally by: Trvaeler The bulk of CCPs income, comes from carebears who don't want EVE to be 'less safe' than it is now. You like "harsh realities", well here it is; As time goes on, Eve will become a much 'safer' place and if CCP survives, I guarantee a few years down the road, high-sec will be 100% safe. It's called capitalism, where what the majority of people want, they get. The minority can take it and stfu or leave. Thank goodness CCP's game philosophy came from the downfall of UO after introducing Trammel. So I kinda doubt your harsh reality will come true anytime soon. And if it does happen, yes, I will no doubt leave. Just as I have left UO a long, long time ago. And no, this is not a threat. Just a statement.
Qui Shon	Posted - 2010.01.18 09:57:00 - [45] Originally by: Femaref It would be stupid to reduce roid-spawnage, as the highsec minerals come mostly from refined mission loot. No, they don't. Only fools who understand nothing of buying for reprocessing because mineral value exceeds item value, who understand nothing of mineral compression, and who don't realize how these can have one set of minerals be refined multiple times, only those who do not understand these very basic fundamentals, would ever draw such inaccurate conclusions from a severely flawed data presentation (aka Grey's or Chrono's table). Flawed to the point where one could even suspect intentional misleading of their audience. Either that or a fundamental lack of understanding of their own game.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 09:58:00 - [46] Originally by: Douglasfeng Edited by: Douglasfeng on 18/01/2010 09:23:23 QQ, Locator Agent ACTIVATE! Cya soon these tears are so juicy i want my share LOL, bring it . this is my main.. u ain't having my hauling alts name tho I was posting in reply to the previous poster who mentioned the missionary position which reminded me how gankers liked to give it from behind. Hence the reply.
Qui Shon	Posted - 2010.01.18 10:05:00 - [47] Originally by: Pater Peccavi It's a cold, harsh universe out there, and that's how CCP meant it to be. It's clearly not harsh enough. Removing all insurance could make it a bit harsher, and that would be good. Right? I sure think so, and it's high time. As for the effect on the mineral market (basket price crash) there are several ways to alleviate or even completely prevent that, if that is desired.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 10:11:00 - [48] Originally by: Qui Shon It's clearly not harsh enough. Removing all insurance could make it a bit harsher, and that would be good. Right? That would pretty much kill pvp. bad idea.
Qui Shon	Posted - 2010.01.18 10:40:00 - [49] Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk Originally by: Qui Shon It's clearly not harsh enough. Removing all insurance could make it a bit harsher, and that would be good. Right? That would pretty much kill pvp. bad idea. Wuss. 1st, I wasn't talking to you. You're not the one towing the "harsh universe" line, or was that your alt? 2nd, it would move pvp in two directions. On one hand, towards cheaper, smaller ships, and on the other hand, towards T2+. The latter is the only legitimate issue, because it could widen the gap between newb and veteran. Eve isn't harsh as long as we have insurance like today.
Zill The Scope	Posted - 2010.01.18 11:22:00 - [50] Removing insurance would not kill pvp don't be so over dramatic. What you really mean it is might make you're griefing mean something. THAT! you don't want. While free griefing is fun for you now, it is not fun for anyone els, that is the only thing your worried about. Having to take a risk for that kill you chest beat over so dearly lol.
Hiroshima Jita	Posted - 2010.01.18 11:25:00 - [51] Originally by: Ekon Bor I'm just curious because it always struck me as kind of odd that people see it as needing prep time. Speaking as a truly awful pvp'er, that is. People who say they need prep time for lowsec or even 0.0 are the ones that are unlikely to ever be more than carebears. Because they don't really need prep time. If they really wanted to pvp they could get into a t1 rifter that could be purchased with the bounty from a handful of rats. The reason they say they need prep time is because they are intimidated by lowsec and 0.0. And I agree that they are intimidating places for noobies. But its never going to get better. Its not like after you have killed you 10,000th battleship rat a light goes on in your head that says, "Now I understand how to defeat the dedicated pvpers that live outside of highsec."
Winterjack	Posted - 2010.01.18 11:28:00 - [52] Originally by: Hiroshima Jita Its not like after you have killed you 10,000th battleship rat a light goes on in your head that says, "Now I understand how to defeat the dedicated pvpers that live outside of highsec." What you say is true. BUT :) Losing a rifter when you have an income of 30k isk a day is one thing, losing a rifter when you've got a steady income of a couple millions from lev2-3 missions is another thing. The modules, more than the ship, of course.
Anosh	Posted - 2010.01.18 11:30:00 - [53] Originally by: Qui Shon Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk Originally by: Qui Shon It's clearly not harsh enough. Removing all insurance could make it a bit harsher, and that would be good. Right? That would pretty much kill pvp. bad idea. Wuss. 1st, I wasn't talking to you. You're not the one towing the "harsh universe" line, or was that your alt? 2nd, it would move pvp in two directions. On one hand, towards cheaper, smaller ships, and on the other hand, towards T2+. The latter is the only legitimate issue, because it could widen the gap between newb and veteran. Eve isn't harsh as long as we have insurance like today. Adding insurance got people doing more PvP by making it less game-ending. Suicide ganking and the fact that ship prices and insurance payouts are de-synched is the problem that needs fixing. Remove insurance completely, people would dock up more (like it was before insurance), PvP would drop off, and the game would suffer. The "right" thing (as countless people have said on both sides of the argument already) is to code in zero payout for losses to Concord. It doesnt stop the suicide ganking completely (which is ok) but it forces more selection and planning to get a return (which is also ok). Question is, can CCP do this ?
Lana Torrin Minmatar Republic Military Skool	Posted - 2010.01.18 11:31:00 - [54] Originally by: Anosh Question is, can CCP do this ? Its just software.. CCP can do anything they truly want.. What happened to my AF boost?
Helicity Boson Amarr The Python Cartel. The Jerk Cartel	Posted - 2010.01.18 11:52:00 - [55] Originally by: Zill Removing insurance would not kill pvp don't be so over dramatic. What you really mean it is might make you're griefing mean something. THAT! you don't want. While free griefing is fun for you now, it is not fun for anyone els, that is the only thing your worried about. Having to take a risk for that kill you chest beat over so dearly lol. You know I hate your guts and you hate mine, but please stop pretending I haven't said about 50 times by now that insurance after being killed by concord needs to go; it's stupid and makes no sense.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 12:08:00 - [56] Originally by: Qui Shon Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk Originally by: Qui Shon It's clearly not harsh enough. Removing all insurance could make it a bit harsher, and that would be good. Right? That would pretty much kill pvp. bad idea. Wuss. 1st, I wasn't talking to you. You're not the one towing the "harsh universe" line, or was that your alt? 2nd, it would move pvp in two directions. On one hand, towards cheaper, smaller ships, and on the other hand, towards T2+. The latter is the only legitimate issue, because it could widen the gap between newb and veteran. Eve isn't harsh as long as we have insurance like today. Even if you weren't talking to me, am i not free to reply? I believe removing insurance would only affect pvp in a negative manner. I, most certianly, would be more careful as to what ships i flew and probably choose t2/faction ships over t1 ever time. The only people that not having insurance wouldn't effect is those of the carebear variety who are adverse to risk in almost any form. Originally by: Zill Removing insurance would not kill pvp don't be so over dramatic. What you really mean it is might make you're griefing mean something. THAT! you don't want. While free griefing is fun for you now, it is not fun for anyone els, that is the only thing your worried about. Having to take a risk for that kill you chest beat over so dearly lol. Jeez are you a troll or just lazy? Please read my posts back. I am saying that Suicide ganking is getting out of control as there are currently to too few/lenient penalties to doing it it. I am all for PVP but have very mixed feeling about suiciding. Until recently i believed there was some kind of penalty for suiciding other players be it losing money through the ship loss and a sec status hit, however people are ingenious and have found a way to circumvent both penalties making suicide ganking more of something to do for laughs than a source of income.
Mike Blink	Posted - 2010.01.18 12:15:00 - [57] Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk Now, i'm sure im gonna get a lot of trolls attracted to this post but..meh. This is the second time in as many weeks that my trading alt has been suicided for nothing (imo) First time i was afk flying un-tanked (1MSE) and i got suicided for 20m isk worth of ammo. The suicider said he was just bored..fair enough.. learned my lesson..always afk with more tank.. 2nd time just happened in jita.. all i was carrying was 3 Jaguars (66m total) I kinda thought nothing of taking them up to jita on AP as i had 4MSE's and it's not really that much isk.. But damn.. it's annoying re-fitting and replacing iterons (and adds to the loss).. Dunno something seems wrong with the mechanic if people can train up an alt..gank whatever they like for small isk..then just bio the character.. Btw i can't put any more tank on an itty mk 4. and i have 20more days till indy 5 when i can just AP transports. (and i do manually fly my t1 indys if they are carrying over 100m of stuff) Checked battleclinic, none of your losses are to disposable alts, they are all characters with some time on them. If you dont want to be ganked, dont autopilot. The system is not broken.
Ravenclaw2kk	Posted - 2010.01.18 12:18:00 - [58] This is my main...... My hauling alt is different.
Winterjack	Posted - 2010.01.18 13:05:00 - [59] Originally by: Anosh Adding insurance got people doing more PvP by making it less game-ending. Suicide ganking and the fact that ship prices and insurance payouts are de-synched is the problem that needs fixing. -cut- The "right" thing is to code in zero payout for losses to Concord. It doesnt stop the suicide ganking completely (which is ok) but it forces more selection and planning to get a return (which is also ok). QFT. SuiGank is not bad in and by itself. Quote: Question is, can CCP do this ? Sure. Question is, does CCP WANT to do this? ;)
Qui Shon	Posted - 2010.01.18 14:11:00 - [60] Originally by: Ravenclaw2kk Even if you weren't talking to me, am i not free to reply? Sure you are, but you need to take context into account. Quote: The only people that not having insurance wouldn't effect is those of the carebear variety who are adverse to risk in almost any form. That's rubbish. I haven't insured ships since...oh, april, may...or something. Granted I'm no harcore pvp:er, occasional would be a better descritpion then hc. Just around 9bn destroyed since I came back from summer break. But, since moving to w-space, I do attempt to engage everything I encounter. I fly a large variety of ships, faction, T3/T2 all the way to T1 bc / cruiser. Covops on covops is my favorite (on the scanning alt). Plus I got this kickass Velator of Doom I've been waiting for a chance to try out. Not 1 ship out of maybe 20 in regular use, have I insured. Quote: ...however people are ingenious and have found a way to circumvent both penalties You certainly don't need to be ingenious to do that. It's pretty obvious, and has been a hot topic for years. Whenever the mineral basket price has gone low enough that ganks become free, there's a surge in hs suicide "gate camps". CCP has repeatedly stepped in and adjusted things, but I sure wish they'd raise costs (from zero), instead of boosting concord yet again.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: 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.