Empty freighters being ganked.

There's obviously no isk gain for the gank, which means the reasons seem on the face of it just for griefing. Are the relationships between PvE style players and PvP style players really that bad these days?

Suicidegank griefing

Ganking is a common tactic used by griefing pilots whose victims often appear in the same systems, at the same times, or are otherwise easy to find with locator service agents. Pilots who are in competing fields, such as resource harvesting, may frustrate those nearby (whether intentionally or not) by decreasing a product's supply in a system, thereby decreasing other pilots' potential profits. This can quickly lead to plans of retaliation, hence, griefing in the form of suicide ganking.

For most ganks, an agitated party will gather one, two, or several inexpensive ships, fit with modules and charges to deliver the highest DPS possible, and begin warping to the target's location. Upon arrival, the aggressors will try to kill their target(s) before they can warp-out -- and if in high security space, before CONCORD Police can respond. After successful gankings, a co-conspirator will usually loot and salvage the wrecks left behind. In some situations, the instigators extort their victims for ISK in exchange for "safety" from future "incidents." In such griefing, the targeted pilots lose their ships, their modules & cargo, and a significant portion of their wallet as well.While suicide ganking remains a controversial tactic to some pilots, it has been firmly established that it plays an important role in the universe of New Eden.

And even that isn't enough to make the carebears in this thread happy.

If you want players to counter gank and set traps then give us something worth ganking. We aren't going to set up traps or spend hours sitting on a gate in hopes of catching a couple 10m destroyers.

Sure you "can" attack a suicide ganker but the question becomes why bother? It's boring, unprofitable, and wont ever accomplish anything.

The best solution :
- All offensive modules against other players disabled in 1.0-0.9
- Instant concord in 0.8-0.7
- No concord ( only NPC milita ships) in 0.6-0.5

Issue solved.
1.Every one is safe in 1.0-0.9
2.Instant death from concord for those who try something bad in 0.8-0.7
3.More fun in 0.6-0.5

....lol ok so that's balanced? To gank you invest 10m isk and a weeks worth of sp. To defend against a gank you have to crash the entire eve market permanently.

Why on earth did i even reply to this nonsense

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

There's space for us all in New Eden.

I may hate what you stand for at times but I'll be damned if I say you don't make me lol hard other times.

+1

I'm taking donations as of NOW!

Stop staring at my boobs! xD

For the first time, I am seriously considering leaving nullsec and starting up a freighter protection service. It seems like the environment is right for a lucrative venture to be made of this.

The only things that Concord protects are beyond the door, especially the donut shops that can be found on level 2 of the food mall present in every station.

Catalysts are crap for ganling under sentry fire with people around.
Thrashers, Mallers, I'll send you a list?
Modules too?
Delivery?

Oh and remember that people say logistics is such a huge issue and everything... *laughs*

Price? (:

While it may have sounded cool in the Dark Knight movie, it doesn't apply to EVE online, which is a computer game. If a group of players just want to watch the game burn, they are probably having a negative affect on the game.

It's a fact that their type of behaviour will make players quit the game. EVE subs are dropping. I'm not wrong.

Oh then I have to decline the offer. :)

That's not a problem. I consider that a great thing, it makes me money.

It's when they insist that their delusion be catered to as if it were reality that it becomes a problem.

This thread needs more tea cosies.

I just see one issue here CCP should take a look at: bumping.

All Freighters were bumped 200+ clicks off the gate by a Machariel. And this is absurd. Those Freighters have no chance to align and warp off. In the meantime the gankers form up, warp on grid first at warp in range to the Freighter, CONCORD shows up, they warp on top and gank. More CONCORD shows up. This will additionally create lag what might make it hard to save your pod.

However. This is just my pov. CCP has to look into this because at a special point this kind of gameplay might be an exploit.

Sorry for starting a rage thread from this point

CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis.

This thread is now about tea, cosies, tea cosies, the need of tea to feel cosy, and why we have a special name for what would normally be called a doily.

Given that, does a house elf wearing a tea cosy merit more comedic response than a house elf without one?

You talk about webbing. CCP still nerfed bumping for a good reason. And I think they need to rebalance it again.

What do you think he 'stands' for?

We're playing a video game, the only problem I see is that some people are too attached and to sensative to be doing this, yet they are.

Because in real life d bags who are d bags just for the sake of being a d bag generally get punished harshly for it.

Screams about how countering suicide gankers is hard and boring

Proving otherwise, with a low SP character and presumably as a relatively new player

not really a new player... playing since 2003.. just can not post with my main ;).... and my proper chars are not welcome in high sec ^^.

Failure to adapt to a changing environment does not merit a rework of the system.

Ah, so look for the NPC corp player who looks like CODE should have ganked them but haven't?

I just want them to actually fly it like players do. AP, hand flying it, whatever. But for a month, and for runs of at least 15 jumps. Back and forth to trade hubs would be just fine. They don't have a clue of what they have been screwing with.

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

There's space for us all in New Eden.

Knowing full well what the reaction of "victim" side would be after this (dev) post (as it was), that post actually falls within this forum rule:



It didn't add anything valuable to the discussion, did side with only one party without helping the other side realize that their views were wrong (with data, statistics, options,...) and it did add fuel to the fire.

I'm relatively new to Eve so I may be misunderstanding something really basic. From what I can gather Eves economy at the basic level revolves around the destruction and construction of assets.

So why are the people who are doing the dying and complaining not making space money hand over fist from the opportunities an activity like ganking provides?

The way I see it is that if stuff explodes there is a need to replace it, minerals need to be mined, stuff needs to be made, hauled to market and sold to other players to do so.

Miners, haulers, manufacturers and traders should be rubbing their palms together with glee at the oodles of space money to be made from it. Sure they'll suffer the occasional loss, which can be got around with planning and forethought, but overall if they grabbed the opportunity with both hands they should be able to profit considerably.

Please tell me you don't actually believe this is a good idea.

..but freighter pilots should be required to have alts.

WHAT?!?!?!? Surely you are not advocating ::effort:: on behalf of freighter pilots who are clearly entitled to engage autopilot >> go make dinner and watch Netflix >> profit!!!

The nerve of some people!

Friendship over!

*slams door

I love the absolute nonsense you spout in your posts, it is actually quite funny. Carebears couldn't care less about low sec pvp, fw or other. It is the end goal of "all" gankers to lock out other people's gameplay, turn the game into trammel.

Remember you force your game play on us, not the other way around, there is plenty of space for you to play in where you don't need to worry about facpo or concord or sec standing.

OMG.. You are asking for proof?!?!?! Why cant you simply take highsec's word for it?!?!! Why must everything be backed up with some sort of factual evidence to support ones claims?!?!?!

Inconceivable!

Friendship over!

*slams door

Im not really ending friendships, im just really into slamming doors today, and it seems kinda empty without emotional content.

It would be ironic if such a change forced a decentralization of trade hubs forcing more trade to move out to low sec.

Not surprising, as it's a bit like a bully in a playground stealing a kids dinner money.

I would expect pirates that have a terrible rep with CONCORD to be shot at by them.
From what you seem to be saying that doesn't happen.

Actually the kid could get the bully sorted if the kid had the resources. But that's the thing it's all about having the resources (and the skills trained in this game). I was forgetting one thing though which was selling kill rights, assuming anybody want to buy them.

Hello Heinrich, allow me to underline the problem here.



There, problem underlined.

Gankers gank what they consider soft targets.

Look at it another way. A random Freighter jumps into system, Dominixes start to bump him. I decide to engage the Dominix. Now are Concord coming to protect the Freighter? or are they coming to protect the Dominix?

By that reasoning their sec status should increase towards 0 every time they get "punished" by CONCORD.
It's simply a gap in the system - minus10 well-known criminal, ganker extraordinaire, the-bane-of-miners, etc. etc. enters the high-security space protected by CONCORD. "Hello citizen! Have a safe and productive day!"
It's like saying Osama Ibn Laden could regularly travel on holidays to the US with the government's approval.

Blowing up your 15mil ISK ship and 15 minutes of safety in a station is "punishment", oh the hilarity.

Just how poor are you?

Come up with a better term then punishment, and no not everyone is punished, the scout, the scanner, the supplier, the bumper (all key players in the gank) all go completely unnoticed by CONCORD and since you brought up real life, in real life accomplices get charged for the crime, not just the trigger man.

He was just making an analogy. Please reserve such butthurt for people who actually condone such actions, or compare players to such people.
His comparison of in-game terrorists to real-life terrorists is not offensive.

Note: I don't actually agree with his point. Ganking is fine.

So the customers decided which players to drive out of the game, wonder what CCP thinks about that. If it was my company I'd be kind of concerned if that was happening.

Bad customers, that's up to CCP to decide not the players.

Really? I don't see any evidence of that, there's less online than there used to be and it's also noticeable that the systems I fly through have less people in them than what they used to have.

I suspect it's a combination of the increased ganking efforts as well as the price of PLEX in-game.

But at the end of the day it's up to CCP how they run their game.

Because you can actually look up my character and see how long I've been around for, and in my experience, in only two years, I've seen a substantial increase in new players. Our alliance is recruiting actual new players who don't know a thing about the game on an almost weekly basis. You, on the other hand appear to have existed for a total of 23 days. Post with your main and prove me wrong.

I at least have the good grace to be an aged alt

Cool now that we have that ourt of the way could you PLEASE address the important parts of my reply, which were the figures and situations regarding trade hubs and the icebelts that contradict your supposition that there are less players in High Sec than there were 5 years ago, please?

You can't imagine the amount of assholes I have to deal with on a daily basis,
just because they lack any manners or decency and think they can own me just because of my looks!

And it's not only men who act that way! Horrible! :O

I can do BOTH! :D

Easy way to check, if we can find the highest figure for online players. Obviously the normal amount at that time would be slightly less.

Sunday afternoon/evening (GMT) always was the busiest time. Probably best to check from around 16:00 (GMT) onwards.

Of course if the figures are indeed increasing we should be getting a new record breaking amount of players online each month.


Find it strange that CCP won't release the figures (from what I heard). If I was running a gaming company I would release the figures for the amount of accounts or players online if they was an increasing trend and wanted to use it for marketing purposes. However, I wouldn't release the figures if that trend was down as it's best left to speculation.

38,000 is very low compared to what they used to get. Often 50k online, I think 68k was the record. They don't anywhere even close to those numbers any more.

1.6 characters created every minute for 48 hours. This proves what exactly?

Is it possible that population is down because it's summer in the northern hemisphere? That happens every year-- summer and population decrease. Not sure why. I doesn't make sense that Eve players would be out in the sun, swimming, barbecuing, throwing Frisbees, etc. There must be some other explanation.

First sentence: Now I understand why you don't react to me. I had no idea you go "that" way.

Second sentence: What??

Hm.

I agree.

Now admire me already.

Everyone? You've obviously never been to my 'hood.

is it

ISD Ezwal's lock always misfires.

Banhammer doesn't need ammo... just saying

...one group who plays the game by the rules, and one group who wants to get the rules changed so the first group can't exist anymore...

Well GM ninjapirate did assist in the writing of the code, and because of it there has been a fall out of subs since you know supplying the market or making isk is bad, mmkay

Grrrr Goons

I'm curious to know why the swamp is naked.

You hate carebears so much it bleeds through almost every post you make, yet you are upset over your perception that someone else is being bigoted? That's rich.

"blowing up their spaceship" is not why you play. Your end game is to entrap people into breaking the law, by any means necessary so you can then turn around and slap down the victim card and use it as a means to bring about real life consequences. You play to affect others real life negatively based purely on known human weaknesses (attaching monetary or other value to invested time, etc.)

To you, Eve is about pushing people to their psychological breaking point, and then pretending they just snapped out of the blue for no reason. All so you can notch your belt with more names of people you got banned.

Is it really PVP when your shooting unarmed, indefensible ships. Or is the PVP you are referring to only in the psychological context such as.

Either way it seems odd that you would take a firm position as the Villain to some and Hero to others, and then get so bent out of shape when one group starts throwing rotten tomatoes.

Get some perspective, and try to remember IT'S A GAME.

Shamans and mages don't count?

Nope.

A Wizard's staff has a knob on the end

Shamans could spec for DPS you know?

Maybe is EVE players spent less time blaming gankers/ccp/'bad people' and spent more time thinking "how can I get better", threads like this wouldn't exist.

Then what would we do for entertainment?

A few things I'd like to see implemented:

• -5.0 to -10 can travel still thru all systems be it in a pod or ship but may only dock with pods. This will allow us to still travel and dock up to do market stuff.
• Once in station we cannot use the stations ship boarding process.. depending on high sec level of system to the players sec status.
• If we wanted to use a ship in systemm we can undock and board a ship while in space just not in the station where we can just sit and wait, wait and wait for ganks.

Not useless, just makes the logistics of ganking less easy. Find the alt orca, get the ships and fits, put in ship go to safe kick out, have pods waiting. etc etc. Fine but it adds complexity and time to the operation that may help our target get away(not rreally). Maybe there should be a rule like bumping freighters and ransoming.. that you can't pop empty freighters or jf with anything less than 50 mil of value in cargo requiring scans of all freighter/jfs before shooting?

The downside being that you've run into Malcanis' Law by crippling the ability of new players to engage in any kind of piracy on their own. Especially if the barrier for entry becomes "Orca or gtfo", all you have done is strip away player freedom for no practical change.

Nevermind that CCP needs to buff ganking, not the other way around.

Exactly it's got risk involved for both parties. You got it, currently little to none..

Serious high sec players post the real facts about ganking.

You and the people like you campaigned relentlessly for the watered down EVE we now have, and now that you have it, you don't like whats happening.

Also Alpacas are not goats they are camels.

Just saying.

I now there's PvPers out there and gankers who love killing targets who have no chance of fighting because they have no weapons.

I just think there should be some way a miner or hauler could arm itself.

Q-ships should be a fact of life in EvE. The ganker looking for a killmail should have to worry if that "easy kill" he is approaching is actually a disguised warship (with 'hell in space' DPS/alpha strike) that just looks like a juicy target.

Not for miners. And that's taking drones into account, which gankers do when they consider attacking miners.

Gankers attack miners knowing almost exactly what they need to kill the miner.

What I think is needed is a way miners can spring a trap and ambush the unwary ganker (who thinks he has a easy killmail coming).

The Venture can already fit guns. Only barges cannot, that is their tradeoff for getting Strip Mining Modules.

Fitting a tank costs yield. It would seem that the gankers are either too lazy or slow to keep up with the miners replacing their ships.
In my experience of gankers is that they are too lazy. They spend the majority of their time sitting in stations waffling on how they are going to get you but never do.

Eg of New order waffle

You have been added as contact
From: DJentropy Ovaert
Sent: 2014.05.03 09:59

DJentropy Ovaert has added you as contact with Terrible Standing

*Red Pen Violation - Gank on sight, 3x permit cost*

3yrs ago you would not have wanted to fly a procurer and they wouldn't have cost 20million isk.
Procurers were bad, the hulk was king 3yrs ago.

is this thread STILL going on.

Love the double-standard, ISD.
Something about "constructive posting" and "redundant posting"?

Or does that only apply when a non-griefer posts?

Concord Captain for a Day. - Ability to hunt down lawbreakers with a negative security status in any Empire system, rewarding the "Captain" by paying more isk for each lower level of Sec status by criminals in the Universe.

I think Fancy wasn't referring to the Concord Captain ship, but to something that actually already exists: the ability to freely shoot outlaws in highsec and anyone anywhere else.

Suicide gankers would love to roam space in high sec, but faction police and criminal timers force us to station camp.

Re ganking specifically - I checked evekill, saw a number of freighters ganked with full bulkheads in 0.5 and <500 mil in cargo. Only 20 catalysts were used for the ganks. This is a joke. 25 mil cost to gank a 1+ bil ISK freighter, supposedly *designed* and fit for cargo transport/tank? Even if the gank fails, the gankers only lose 25 mil and a bit of sec status.

On top of this, the gankers are alts. There is literally no way to decent way to fight back.

In RL, if you want to "watch the world burn" that's fine, but it's a risky business. In EVE, you're right at home.

The cost is out of balance Tippia. You can't ignore cost and only look at pilot numbers. It should not be possible to gank a +1 billion ISK hull, especially one supposedly design for transport, so cheaply.

Even if this was 200 mil it wouldn't matter, the number is still too low. It should *at least* cost the same amount as the hull cost to gank a freighter.

Re alts - I don't understand how you think gank alts are good for the game, but ok.

The point is there is no way to "win" against gankers. If that doesn't scream "broken" then I don't know what does. Scouting, etc. can save you from being ganked, yes, but so what? Scouting is a hassle and boring, no one should have to do that unless they're moving something expensive in HS (if they lose a cheap ship, they should at least be able to take satisfaction in the fact that the gankers lost a lot more than they did). And even so, just because you scout the gankers doesn't mean you won, it just means you didn't lose.

Yeah, but little freedom for those who want to put out the fire. Not everyone is like you. But too bad for them, right? Find another game? They will.

What? Cost shouldn't matter? What's the reason for that exactly? lol

Think armored car in RL transporting money. It only has 2 guys in it. Surely, 20 guys should be able to take that NP right? Should be easy...

This thread is still going?

No choice then... (SFW)

Logi, ECM, blap boats.

You can have the same in high as everywhere else: scouts, logis, links, ewar, and GÇö quite simply GÇö a whole bunch of firepower.

Scout, webbing frig, ECM cruiser if you want to overdo it.
Scout is probably more than enough.

EvE still has some of the largest non-PvP content in the gaming industry.

nothing like spanking gankers in an indy.

I don't think HS should be "safe", but right now the issue is that it's simply too safe for pirates - specifically, it's just not risky enough to gank.

Given the millions of trips made every month and the few dosen that are killed I would say It exceedingly rare.

In High Sec, that would mean that when someone ganks a ship, he couldn't simply abandon the wreck and let anyone, including that shiny neutral Orca waiting a few km away, loot it as he would immediately become suspect! I think this would had lot of fun ^^ and hopefully some fights!

1) I don't see the point of implying Eve Uni in this: I think forum is a place where a relative new player could learn/ask question as well?

2) last time I saw a ship ganked, it seems to me that the wreck of that ship was blue, but I may be wrong in which case, my suggestion is actually pointless and I will remove it, but just to be sure: do you mean that if a player A is ganked by a player B (ie.: killed illegitimately), the wreck A (I don't care of the wreck B) cannot be abandoned by the player B, and in consequence, a player C cannot loot it without being suspect?

Thanks

Well, that will be my last post here I presume... I will always fail to try to apology for posting some suggestion based on my one (very small) eve experience.....

.....Thanks to those who take some time to explain how this works. o7

When we ran our caldari ice interdiction we killed about 600 macks in two weeks. Despite having a month of warning not a single one fitted a tank.

Yes, there is an imblance: ganking is far too difficult and rare right now and could use a few buffs. Dialling back the CONCORD response would probably be a good first step.

Sure, lets spend several billion pointlessly to do the job of 20 t2 destroyers...

If the missioner did less then watch netflix for 40 minutes, while browsing reddit on his phone with his feet up and beer in one hand, while waiting for the wtm call. Then yes you are correct he did put in less effort then me.

Or do you mean in the actual 12 seconds of combat? Where i was free to fly into optimal, lock up my target, overheat and when the call was made push f1? You know what! You're right! I earned that 30m payday for that gruelling 40 minutes of netflix and 12 seconds of intense combat which actually made me put my beer down.

Did I mention this was with a week old character in a 5m ship?

No I don't think suicide ganking needs a buff, no I would not call the act of suicide ganking difficult, nor would i refer to a half dozen ships warping to a target to push f1 overly "organized"

Yes i would say it's in a good place based on sp required, isk investment and payout per hour in high sec.

It's probably a dwindling career path because it's boring and the pay is garbage, which seems about right for the required investment.

Mission runners already have to worry about incoming dps, managing cap, managing drones, mission triggers, mission items, webs/scrams/ewar in general, ship placement, transversal, range/falloff, etc.

Does the fact that someone had to scan his fit and do some math, then scan him down really mean the ganker worked harder?

Or that it was difficult?

Or that some how they earned to right to catch him unprepared?

Ganking seems to be in a good place as far as balance goes, it punishes the stupid but isn't overly rewarding and given the risk invested in it that seems like a fair trade off.

Sorry to tell you but I do not believe CCP that they really investigate into alt recycling.

I just witnessed a freighter gank where around 15 catalysts flew in with nice standing.

Considering the current gank rate, the fact that it is always the same Machariel pilot doing the freighter bumping, I have a hard time believing that they recruit a new set of 10-20 pilots for a gank.

If CCP would enforce their own rules gankers would fly in being cherry red like the baboon derrieres they are. This would allow preventive actions against this pest. Having to wait until they become criminals just makes it more difficult.

The proposal to "report them" is silly. I do not have the data to prove a violation. In fact, it is impossible for me to prove a recycle.

I also do not like the speculation about what is illegal and how CCP goes against them. That is just guesswork. Until today, I did believe that alt recycling is not a common practice. Yet, after my observation in Niarja I have my doubt.

Exactly!

But if be 'we' you mean 'all half-awake anti-gankers', Leadership I will be enough to fleet them all.

...Q-ships...

Ah so we've moved from 'Show me the data!' to 'The data is obviously wrong!'. Ok then..

Source is zkillboard. Search Charon, Losses, page back to the relevant dates.

Interesting....

According to the same KB Red Frog hasnt lost a single freighter in that time frame

Which is odd, as statistically you think that as high users of them, they would be garunteed to have lost at least one

Hmm
perhaps theres something amiss here...

Honestly, I was under the impression that all of Red Frog's Freighters were NPC alts anyway (to avoid war dec issues). So the kill board wouldn't be an accurate place to asess those numbers - you'd need to look at their internal reimbursement numbers.

I'm very interested in the 2014 figures. CODE. only started freighter ganking this year.

Honestly, it's hard to draw that conclusion, since we don't have any idea of the actual numbers of contracts that were lost (as opposed to failed for some other reason) and what percentage of those were lost to ganks as opposed to awox/stupidity. All we can really say for sure is that RF got better at performing their core business - getting boxes from here to there without losing them.

Because different parts of space have different rules/mechanics? This allows the game to support a variety of different player preferences and play-styles. No, a frigate should not be able to kill a marauder in HS.

The cost to gank it should be balanced based on something better than it is now. I'm suggesting to use the hull value as a guideline for any balance changes with ganking.

.... suicide ganking is just a way to avoid having to war dec.

I am not saying it shoudl nto exist. I jsut think that destroyers are TOOOO effective on taht role. Make the game look even more stupid. If it was not for destroyers at least I could pretend that the gankers are being penalized when concord appears :P

I know that nerfign the destroyers is a problem because the ship has an INTENDED role (that is nto suicide ganking) that shoudl not be attacked.

W(here)TF did you learn how to spell?

Your argument is invalid.

You also haven't taken into account the difficulty of pulling together 20+ person fleets

didn't want those thirty-two pods anyway

Good try. But knowing where you do the ganking, in systems (specially some of the most lucrative), where the missioners will nto be tanking against Thermal.. you are facing 50K EHP on most marauders.


I jsut wish battleships would have a tad more EHP so that would not be a problem.

I would say it is mostly ignorance and hearsay they spew, I guess that could be seen as lying but I don't see it that way.

Educating them is all we can do, be it the hard way or the easy way, the choice is entirely theirs.

So.....when forced to go through a bottleneck system, use one of the many OTHER ways to avoid a freighter gank.

Scout it to see if it's camped, web your freighter through with an alt, split your load and drag it through with multiple trips in a blockade runner.....


ohhh, you can also use a jump freighter, bounce from Amarr to a nearby lowsec to Jita, and dodge ALL the gank bottlenecks.

I have noticed an increase in ganking as well.

Maybe Goonswarm set a standard with the last Burn Jita? Who knows. I have been hauling around stuff and it seems every trip I've been scanned at least once, like it's protocol to scan me or something.

Anyways, in my region of space I particularly do not really care in general, but I do feel that if ganking goes unchecked this alone would cause a loss of subs. It's High Sec...ganking should be made extremely difficult for those that have a -10 standing. Actually my thought was until a -10 to where entering HS at all in anything but a pod results in being killed by CONCORD. Anyhow, any negative standing up until -10 would increase difficulty on traveling through HS.

Such as, perhaps, certain stations have a certain minimum standing requirement to be allowed to dock up at except for Jita to be fair.

Hardly? The problem is, while sure a grief gank here and there isn't necessarily game breaking, the act of it happening every time you are needing to go through a particular area that requires the use of a bottleneck system with no legit way around could cause a lack of enthusiasm for playing the game. Freighters are practically defenseless, no way for one to get a chance at survival unless the FC of the gank fleet screws up somehow.

Maybe a special type of point defense EW system is needed. An AoE weapon that is designed to only target and cripple ships hostile towards you, and that can only be fitted on freighters.

Well all that is falascious usage of statistic. Torturign numbers like that I can prove even that freighter ganking is direclty proportional to the ammount of cars sold by ford.

Try again with the simple obvious addition of excluding the ships that are not industrial from your jump tables. Do that by takign the percentage of ships in eve that are industrial /freighter and multiply your value by the inverse.

The number suddenly rises a LOT. Where to get these numbers? The old economical reports have it, the percentage of industrial ships should not have changed much....

BTW, no your haulers in peorcentage of the total kill doe snot mean the same. If you think it does than you fail at statistics of discrete systems.

Lmao! No the fact that there is no better info available does not mean your admittedly flawed stats "stand" by default. Your stats actually show nothing to prove the "very very small" chance of having a freighter ganked in Uedama, unless of course you can provide a % of freighter jumps?

Take for example if the number of freighter jumps for the same period are 3, that would mean with 3 freighters ganked there is a 100% chance of being ganked in Uedama. See how easily we can bend stats to fit our needs?

Your traffic scenario of 35k jumps a day being all haulers is just as likely as the number of hauler jumps being 3, both are complete and utter trash. Unless you know the true number or have a way of accurately estimating the number of those total jumps that were tied to freighters we can't say if it's an appropriate number or not.

Please point to the bit where he said that.

His very last calculation, can't crop on my phone sorry.

Something along the lines of

"Total number of suicide ganks vs total jumps 7/35k = .002%" seeing as how he only used the suicide ganked haulers (7) in his calculation and that it is the topic for discussion i assumed that he was only referring to that. The total number of suicide ganks would be far greater then 7, all those pods don't die without paying the concord.

lol bear in mind I only used the numbers for freighters and other haulers inc Orcas, so those figures exclude any other type of suicide gank, ie any pods or wandering miners.

Also did you take the hourly number of kills and the 24 hour number of jumps? Currently for the last 24 hours it's at 1500 kills + another 80 pods and 30k jumps. Unless i'm miss understanding something which is possible, going to double check on this now.

If you want to battle stupid points, 3 is actually going to be closer to the true number of freighter jumps then 35k, unless you honestly believe over 50% of the traffic through Uedama is freighters.

I agree with you and based on the numbers, ganking once again seems to be in a good place, no changes required. 2 reasons I'm still talking

#1 jonah still doesn't seem to get it

#2 we only have 4 pages to go!

Can you share this data? So far it's been a unicorn that people keep referring to.

So it's laughably rare yet at the same time such a 'shocking departure from the norm of highsec life' that everyone's up in arms about it? Can you explain how those two statements fit together in any way please?

Well every time we've tried to pull actual data, it's just dismissed out of hand despite each set showing exactly the same trend. I guess that's what happens when a handful of suicide gankers sense their favourite pastime might be at risk as a result of their own reckless actions.

I'm pretty bored now, so I'll just leave you with the words of James 315 in his latest post on BumpMining..



Yes you are guys, and we all know what happens when any predator becomes too good at killing..

There was a very strong trend in 2012, 2013, 2014 with each year showing huge growth (over a 50% increase) in both # of concord kills and # of charon losses.

As for the wardec issue the data was compiled from the same source, unless there was some patch between 2012-2014 that would have increased the number of wardecs significantly it would be safe to assume the % lost to wardecs would remain constant throughout.

Ganking today is nothing like in the past, not even close.

Present this data please. I keep hearing about it, but I've never seen anyone actually link to it. I'm quite willing to admit that if it exists and shows what you say it shows, that the argument over miner ganking is done.

Can people stop using this statistic of # of jumps/trips please, it's utterly irrelevant to the impact ganking has on the game. The relevant metric is active freighters unless every freighter pilot is only carrying out a single jump or trip in the relevant time period. It's just picking out big numbers because they make a problem look insignificant.

Does anyone know how to get the data on number of active freighter in a time period?

So after 100 pages of 'discussion', the question seems to be "is it the gankers who drive people away, or the people who can't stop bitching about the gankers?".

Seems to me if there's so few ganks in the grand scheme of things, maybe if the people crying about it would STFU/HTFU, more people might be inclined to try Eve.

The narrative on the subject is so distorted that you can't even attempt a constructive discussion on highsec without getting your topic flamed and derailed by everyone, including the game devs.

Really, after reading snippets of threads like this one, I have to laugh when people wonder why EVE isn't more popular.

Seriously? 'We assume' that 2 year old data is still true because CCP haven't specifically said it isn't?

And my axe.

Because of fools like you constantly arguing about something they obviously know nothing about? It was my motivation....

I'm confused, you're the pigeon right?

It's not, we just use 50% more ships to do it. I'm not sure how this concept could be made any easier for you to understand.

i'd be on the edge of my seat if my immense girth allowed me to move so far

The number of ships destroyed also includes the gankers destroyed by CONCORD. Your math needs work.

Eve kill uedama front page had 3 freighters and 44 catalysts, brutixes and taloses, as a vague analysis, it's probably in the ballpark, but also in my experience non peak has less ganks per jump too..

Ramming another vessel should cause damage depending on the speed, and count as act of aggression. Arriving and departing from stations and gates could have a invuln timer to enable the pilot to maneuver and stop.

This would add a lot of more fun, realism, and stops certain simple minded exploits which are only possible because of a lack of realism.

I can't even move around space without someone following me with the intention of ganking me. Whether it be in a pve ship/mining ship, or freighter/hauler. There isnt even really any point in playing if you can't enjoy the game. I have been sitting in a station for months just training skills...

And before being called carebear, most of my pvp experience has been logistics, or small fleet stuff. It's different when you go out in a pvp ship, you expect to blow up.... Rather than being in a mission site and being probed out for the sake of hassling you..


What's the point of eve these days anyways.

You should really stop breathing....it's really not that necessary for your existence.

You are clearly channeling your inner Dinsdale.

So is claiming the pointless bounty system is causing eve's downfall.

I didn't ask for anything to be changed. I was just stating an observation.

It's not specifically ganking by itself that is the problem, it's that people are now taking it too far and efforts should be made to curb that behaviour.

Oh, please do. Goblin hasn't had anything good to complain about in a while.

.... and to me it seems like ganking is seriously on the rise.

I have good memories of being stationed in Turkey and having that experience exactly as described - with Turkish Tuborg.

I agree criminals with bad standing -0.1 to -10 shot not able to dock ore enter Highsec no more ore make concord inst shot to the criminal
2 months has past and noting is fix CCP haw long it will take to fix this.

Date 13.07.2014 03:53 Drone damage exploit notification
CCP you THREATENED EVE players not to do the damage exploit ore you will. (We consider this a serious exploit and abuse of it will not be tolerated. There will be repercussions for any user engaging in this activity until the issue is fixed, and this will be our only warning regarding the problem.)

Ok we fully understand and we follow the rule but when EVE players support ticket ore post new thread regarding Ganking ore other mane issues NOTING IS FIX.

Your problem is that you're trying to fight fire with fire. We say 'do something about it yourself' and you start whining about how gankers hide in station, know how to use bookmarks to insta-undock, yadda, blah, etc.

Oh poor ******* you.

The reason you get zero sympathy from anyone outside the whiney, entitled, anti-ganker community is because the problem is not the gankers.

The problem is you.

You refuse to accept the responsibility for your own actions. Thousands of haulers/miners a day successfully undock, go about their business, make isk, and safely redock. They do this by taking responsibility for their own safety. They read guides on how to make themselves less of a ganking target, and unlike you, they put those methods into practice.

They don't have a problem with gankers. Only you and your ilk, apparently a small minority, have a problem.

There is only one way to fix this imaginary problem with gankers. The whiney entitlement mindset people don't need to HTFU, you just need to GTFO.

You whine that we're ruining how you want to play the game, well what do you think you're doing to us? The difference is we play the game by the rules while you whine like a child to get the rules changed cause you don't like them.

I'm not a ganker, and after 117 pages it gets kinda hard to differentiate who's who when I'm posting using my phone at work. Beyond my comments being tossed at the wrong target, they're still valid comments.

Failing to defend yourself is not a gameplay style.

It will not help you, tank ore no tank CODE ore Goonswarm will gank you no matter how hard you try

Of course, but do you know why so many people live in high sec because Goonswarm and the CODE control Low sec and Null sec, and High sec (CODE).
Goonswarm supply CODE with ships and armaments, because Goonswarm has unlimited supply and ISK + the Higesec Trading market, no matter haw meniy people you assemble, Goonswarm will destroy you in mater in min and CODE will make sure that all the supply you got will get gank

I did something here I very rarely do, posted a very good fit and gave up some trade secrets, all in the name of being helpful to hauler pilots. Yet you spit in my ******* face for it? What kind of arsehat does that? Don't be that guy.

I've been hauling on my alt for the two years I've had him and do you know how many times he's been ganked? I'll give you a hint, it's less than one. Do you know how many times people have tried, including CODE.? I'll give you another hint, it's more than one. Way more than one.

Seriously, use the T2 shield rigs, I'm not kidding, they are worth the extra dough. Put them on in EFT and watch your EHP go even higher.

The Nereus is exceptional for tanking, yes, but I do prefer the Wreathe simply because of its alignment speediness. That, I think, is more important when running gate or station gankers, and it can still tank the limited firepower they'll be able to get off on you while you're aligning, if any.

All that sig bloom from the shield extenders helps the targeting matter quite a bit.

Griefers vary in definition, but if you use the definition "To do something that makes no sense in the game, except it causes the other player pain", then yes EVE is full of griefers.

An industrial player can understand and deal with cost benefit, and work around that, but it becomes hard to deal with the "watch the world burn people". This is why in most polite societies these people get a terrorist badge and up in jail forever. Not, just because they killed someone, they disrupted society (and business).

I do not own a freighter since I can withstand the loss of some idiot ganking it, "just because"., it would help run my little industry operation, but profits are just not high enough for loss of one freighter to kill profits for a few weeks.

Like the OP, I do not mind ganking, it is the perm -10.0 using holes in the system to continuously do it, that does not seem right (sort of like the yo yo Concord trick, where realism has to be ignored to keep completely valid tactic under most circumstances from being exploited.)

My suggestions, has always been if you reach -9 or lower NPC police will try and kill your pod and only low sec stations will accept your medical clones. Seems like a realistic disadvantage to being a known arsonist.

Well actually, as long as we are indulging, it would make sense for pirate NPC factions to offer kill missions on players. Imagine you got someone turbo-farming Serpentis consistently. It would make sense that the worse your standing with them, the more they will want to see you get... discouraged. So why not let other players visit their agent out in nullsec and get a "kill this guy" mission and the target is another player?

That and NPC corps wardeccing each other and we got some game on.

HELL NO!

As many NPC ships as I've killed in the last 7 years, if you implemented something like this, EVE would become self aware for the sole purpose of manufacturing robots that would stalk me in real life. I'd look out my window and see and Dread Guristas tank rolling down my street looking for me. As cool as that would be, I don't want that to be the last cool thing I ever see lol.

Oh look, the most coddled players in a video game living in the safest, most comfortable space think they have it bad. High Sec should be renamed "1st World Space".

It should be almost impossible, but it is not if you are willing to use any of the workarounds, it is mainly a second account and you are somewhat immune to the police due to the fact that they do not pod.

And the players who do this are basically playing street thugs that the police ignore

I am just saying rework it so that people can not simply build a "professional ganker" character (and it is really a pretty low sp job, to do get an adequate destroyer based one.) and be in effect immune to the impact of criminal status.

Fail troll is fail.

I agree with your stance on pretty much everything in this thread but I do have to call you out on this, sorry .

None of those people you have named were raving lunatics interested solely in the destruction of all around them simply for enjoyment. That is what gankers are roleplaying. Those leaders were in fact looking to build something grand. Creation of a newer, larger society under their control. They used violence to achieve their goals but violence itself was not the goal.

Think youre slightly missing the point.

Gankers hit you with element of surprise, if dont correctly there is very little risk, and the rewards can be great. You dont even need to grind your sec anymore you can buy sec back.

When you have ganked someone its too late for them to do anything, and mostly are carebears anyway so they probably cant even pvp. You know this and i do, so please dont post this type of response.

I think personally you gank something in highsec you should get a massive sec status hit, you should also be able to be podded by NPC. Also they should allow freighters to fit a damn good tank....

then it makes things a little more interesting

HA HA HA HA HA HA. Yeah, let's make it so that it's possible to take off seventy percent of a well-fit mackinaw/skiff's tank before CONCORD begins its eighteen-second timer.

but no amount of what you do will ever come to 100% safety, unless you never undock.

...This is one reason EvE is not intuitive, the laws of physics are secondary to CCPs ability to code.

So what would happen in real space?

First they would have some sort of traffic control to prevent collisions. Pretty sure CCP could implement that. Also seeing the success other markets would open up nearby, success breeds competition. We players could do that.

Instead we have a bogus collision mechanic which (surprise, surprise) can be exploited.

Jonah, you seem smart enough. And I don't disagree with the physics. But does that mean you are defending two large objects collide in space and nothing happens?

The laws of physics are secondary to most forms of entertainment. Films, comics, games, books etc. all make use of a phenomenon known as willing suspension of disbelief, which is where the viewer, reader, player etc puts aside what they know to be true about the world and embraces the reality presented to them.

Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life.

Try to address this question: Why should suicide ganking be the only high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game?

EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that.

Q: Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.
A: You can make money now from manufacturing freighters, if I where to manufacture freighters, sell them on the market, then when people buy them have a gang of catalyst out side, BOOM! they need to buy another one. Profit mmmmm

D:

YOU HATE ME!!! D:


D:

How can it be that a lifelong suicide ganker with a -10 sec status gets the exact same punishment as a 5.0 sec status guy on his first gank?

I've supported sliding scale punishments based on security status.

The exact same tripe he wrote in the other two threads.