Tippia, your posts are full of inconsistent misinformation.

also incorrect, as the ratio still leads itself in favor of the ganker, 3 fitting brutix still comes out to less then one fitting hulk. thus the gankers win

Tippia, your posts are full of inconsistent misinformation. You're either:

a) Purposefully lying or

b) Genuinely believe this nonsense.


If the latter, then it's impossible reasoning someone out of an argument that they didn't reason themselves into in the first place. If the former, then you need to realize that you 're not fooling anyone. The people that chant your drivel already support it, not because they believe it to be true, but because it's what they do.

Carry on, goons.

GǪsuch as?

The ganker is worse off

Again, such as your ridiculous claim that:



As I said, arguing with you is pointless and a massive waste of time.

And look at the goons, desperate for attention. Here, have some :).

I know its hard to figure things like this out by yourself so Ill help...

DCF gets to vote for more than one person per CSM election correct?

sooooooo...

each person 72% of 0.0 wants in will GET IN

sooooooo...

noone else anyone wants in will get there cause theyll be outvoted.

So all those people will come qqing to the forums afterwards.

I hope that wasnt too hard for you.

Again, such as your ridiculous claim that:

Do you honestly believe the losses against the suicide ganker are worse than the losses to the miner?

Lets see if you can ignore my alliance tag for long enough to make a coherent point.

Why does the ratio need to favor the gankee over the ganker?

In short, you're failing the burden of proof of your own argument. You state that this ratio favors the gankers but you fail to state why this is actually a problem and why it should be considered such.

maybe because ganker chooses time, place, victim and fit to attack? And no gankee? So ganker ALREADY HAS favor. Well yes. Place and time ganker and gankee choose "together". But final decision about attack belongs to ganker. So gankee should have something too.

ok, we'll give you an invincible police force that instajams and neuts as soon as it shows up on the field, will show up within 20 seconds at the outer end, and destroys the ganker 100% of the time

there, problem solved

Ganking is a bit one sided, they're usually an organised group they kill the target, don't care if their ships are destroyed because they get the insurance and they have a pick-up person ready to loot the wreaks. So the gankers get the loot plus insurance and the laugh, the guy getting ganked just gets the insurance which is nothing to his/her loses. Loses depending what kind of target.

Don't know about you but it seems one sided to me.

Ganking is a bit one sided, they're usually an organised group they kill the target, don't care if their ships are destroyed because they get the insurance and they have a pick-up person ready to loot the wreaks. So the gankers get the loot plus insurance and the laugh, the guy getting ganked just gets the insurance which is nothing to his/her loses. Loses depending what kind of target.

Don't know about you but it seems one sided to me.

ok, we'll give you an invincible police force that instajams and neuts as soon as it shows up on the field, will show up within 20 seconds at the outer end, and destroys the ganker 100% of the time

there, problem solved

who are you again?

"Eve is a game driven by consequences for actions."

Yet the suicide gankers have no consequence. Being destroyed yet refunded for your losses is not a consequence of any meaning.

Let's look at it this way, people are able to fill freighters up with battleships and modules, pick an area, go there and gank the hell out of the miners there, all they need is a ganking character and character to give it the ship. That people can do this just goes to show that EVE is a game of consequences, but only if you're a miner.

Why do threads like this get so big? Because half the people posting are gankers who don't want their insurance payout taken away. They preach lines like "EVE is hardcore" "You're not safe anywhere, always at risk" But that's not true, there is a group of people who take no risk atall, and that is the gankers, there is no risk in what they do, they break even or sometimes profit, they risk nothing to do a suicide gank. They will die, they know this, they also know that insurance will pay the bill.

Insurance payout for suicide ganking is a really stupid feature.

when I fly my hauler blind into a gatecamp and get owned by bubbles and interceptors, this is evidence of a game inbalance in favor of the gankers: you see, their superior organization, numbers, and tactics mean the game is unfair because my incompetence did not beat all three of those

I think the biggest issue that people are having is the relative cost of exhumers, how little they actually make, and how easy they are to kill.

Bubbles in high-sec, yeah right :P

Talking about high-sec ganking not low sec pirating or even 0.0 for that matter.

i don't care what you're talking about your basic argument is "i should be able to win by default even against superior numbers, tactics, and organization" its a fundamentally moronic position