EVE Search - Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 25 post(s)
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 3	Posted - 2014.08.31 11:40:00 - [1] - Quote Derrick Miles wrote: baltec1 wrote: Derrick Miles wrote: They're not really putting pilots to death if they wake up in a station a second after their ship blows up. Unless we get into some existentialism here, which I admit might be more interesting than where this thread has been going lately. Sure they are. You died which is why clone number 175 woke up (unless your the broker, that guy has dozens of himself wandering around at any one time). Yes, but if you can't tell the difference between you and your clone, did you die and your clone woke up, or did your old clone die and you woke up? They don't actually kill you just blow up your ship which is the only punishment due to capsuleers being so powerful and useful. Also the empires don't really care all that much if capsuleers kill each other they just don't want them doing it in secure space. Makes the peons edgy.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 7	Posted - 2014.08.31 22:51:00 - [2] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Veers Belvar wrote: Career criminals like the CODE folks should not be "put to death" rather they should face jail sentences, like for say 30 days, where they are unable to leave the dockup. The second invincible NPC pirates start chasing mission runners, sure. Until then, "occupational hazard" can't be something you only apply to the people you don't like. Suicide gankers don't care about CONCORD, ship loss is already factored into their risk/reward. What does not make sense is releasing repeat offenders every 15 minutes so they can continue to commit the same crime. Then you also don't understand why the allies allowed dozens of german and japanese war criminals to get away scot free after WWII?
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 7	Posted - 2014.08.31 23:09:00 - [3] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: Nitchiu wrote: Veers Belvar wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Veers Belvar wrote: Career criminals like the CODE folks should not be "put to death" rather they should face jail sentences, like for say 30 days, where they are unable to leave the dockup. The second invincible NPC pirates start chasing mission runners, sure. Until then, "occupational hazard" can't be something you only apply to the people you don't like. Suicide gankers don't care about CONCORD, ship loss is already factored into their risk/reward. What does not make sense is releasing repeat offenders every 15 minutes so they can continue to commit the same crime. Then you also don't understand why the allies allowed dozens of german and japanese war criminals to get away scot free after WWII? What? That's one of the oddest analogies I've ever seen. Hear of a place called Nuremberg? And someone who in the past committed a crime, but is currently not committing one, bears no analogy to someone who every 15 minutes is blowing up ships and getting re-arrested. Having a revolving door justice system for -10 sec status suicide gankers is laughable. Well since you don't understand then let me explain. Yes some **** war criminals were tried after the second world war but many others including the Japanese unit 731 did not face any charges. Why? Because they had valuable skills or information. Capsuleers provide very valuable services to the empires and as long as they don't get too out of hand the empires turn a blind eye to their activities. CONCORD blowing up a ship is the EvE equivilent of the Nuremberg trial. A show to give the common people the impression that justice was done when in reality many of the worst criminals got away with nothing. Edit: Apparently the german WWII ruling faction is blocked.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 8	Posted - 2014.08.31 23:40:00 - [4] - Quote Solecist Project wrote: The really weird part is that it reads like I am an actual criminal. Actually your a very valuable resource for the empires Unless you actually are a vicious war criminal and you didn't know
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 8	Posted - 2014.08.31 23:53:00 - [5] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: I'm not really sure how we went from space pirates to prosecutorial discretion vis-a-vis WWII Germany war criminals. Well the prosecutorial discretion is the key. CCP has decided not to allow CONCORD the discretion of blapping bumpers. Therefor they don't. Also "Lore reasons". And as one poster explained, getting away from a bumper is actually very easy if you know how. If you really want to help the poor freighter pilots being bumped you can now explain to then how to get away. Assuming they aren't AFK.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 9	Posted - 2014.09.01 00:16:00 - [6] - Quote Derrick Miles wrote: Benny Ohu wrote: Veers Belvar wrote: 15 minute jail sentence same reason you get an insignificant fine or get chucked in the barracks with everything removed from your inventory but the lockpick you need to ironicquote blow this joint unironicquote and get back to slaying dragons rabbits et cetera the reason is that a computer game and an actual jail have completely different design goals This is a point I think a lot of people are missing in this thread. You can only draw so many real life parallels to criminal activity in the real world and in game since the consequences are far different for each. In Eve causing death and destruction is equivalent to a parking ticket. It's more like people bring in RL comparisons to justify their beliefs and other show them how even in real life it doesn't work that way
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 11	Posted - 2014.09.01 06:02:00 - [7] - Quote NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: EVE's future has been fine for ten years, despite the likes of you crying about how it will die! if CCP doesn't ban PvP in highsec. And yet, here we are, still here, still playing the game. . people still play ultima online and hello kitty online. Your argument is totally invalid. Nobody is asking for an end to high sec pvp. That is so ridiculous. Do try to think before you post. You seem to be confused about what pvp is. Suicide gankers are only successful because people don't expect it. Most of the victims of freighter ganks aren't even aware it was possible. Its not real pvp. Its just abusing lack of knowledge about the game, similar to margin trading scam. Its bad game design all around, nomatter how you look at it and doesn't fit in with the risk/reward that EVE is supposed to have. This thread has grown to over 150 pages solely due to the refusal of a minority to accept this obvious fact. If you kill ganking high sec pvp dies. War decs are meaningless and easily avoided. Where else will high sec pvp come from? Duels on Jita undock? You are right on one thing. Suicide gankers are only successful because people don't expect it. Being AFK makes it hard to expect anything. High sec is totally 100% safe if you follow low/null survival rules. Litterally 100%. The only reason ganks happen is because people can't be bothered to protect themselves because they think they don't need to. And 99% of the time they are right. What that means is that Suicide ganking is actually too hard. Much Much Much too hard. New players need to learn the survival rules not 'I can do whatever I want without consequences'.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 14	Posted - 2014.09.01 06:36:00 - [8] - Quote NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Tippia wrote: NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Ah, yes, the typical victim-blaming mentality. "Its the homeowners fault the robber broke into his house because they didn't have a good enough security system". No, it's the typical self-selection-blaming mentality: GÇ£if you're going to wander aimlessly across the savannah in a meat suit, don't be surprised if the lions maul you (oh, and next time, try a jeep and a set of khakis instead)GÇ¥. Quote: All the arguments in support of suicide ganking seem to be pretty ludicrous. And none here seem to want to address the fact that suicide ganking is performed in high sec, victimizes mostly unaware, casual players, and has extremely negligible penalties and risk, totally broken in terms of risk/reward. No. They all address the former (which is why the consistent suggestion is to be aware) and they all correct the latter (since it is based almost entirely on ignorance). So what's so ludicrous about the argument in support of ganking? So you expect that every player should know everything about the game to avoid things like suicide ganking. And that is how suicide ganking is supposed balanced? Such a ridiculous and unrealistic expectation, especially of the newer players that are most often the victims of such tactics. Needless to say you've lost this one, Tippia. Do try to not be so obnoxiously unrealistic. If suicide ganks were such an issue any helpful player would go on and on about how to avoid them and tell newbie to be careful. So yes I expect that every player in the game should know how to avoid suicide ganking. And no suicide ganking is not balanced. It is much to hard to do. The cost of doing business is much too high and the amount of effort targets put into avoiding them is much to low. People have to stop thinking about high sec as safe sec and think of it as a place where you still need to follow all the basic protection rules because you can and will blow up if you get too complacent.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 14	Posted - 2014.09.01 06:40:00 - [9] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: The debate is not over whether there should be suicide ganking. The debate is over the appropriate risk reward for such activity, and whether buffs/nerfs are needed to achieve such risk/reward. In my view the consequences for -10 sec status are far too light, and ganking ships is far too easy. Had a suicide ganker come into my L3 mission during my first week or two of the game and blown up my Hurricane, leaving me bankrupt, I probably would have quit and moved on. The fact that it is easy for a ganker to do so (think what a couple of tornadoes could do), suggests to me that there current game mechanic is seriously flawed (see also the crazy venture killing contest). And clearly the risk reward is much too low. The only people who do significant ganking are the New Order people who have an SRP. Something is obviously wrong if you have to get paid for ganking to be worth the trouble.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 14	Posted - 2014.09.01 06:44:00 - [10] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: They are an issue, and people do discuss them with new players. CODE has been vastly increasing the number of suicide ganks, and the players are dying by the score. See https://zkillboard.com/alliance/99002775/ Obviously the cost of doing business for them is not "too high" because they are making a killing off their ganks. And they have dozens of people bankrolling their mayhem. Litterally hundreds of billions of ISK. That is why they are ganking so much. If they had to pay for all their ships themselves they wouldn't be ganking anywhere's near as much. CODE. can afford to gank unprofitable ships because people are paying them to gank.

Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 14	Posted - 2014.09.01 06:56:00 - [11] - Quote NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Tippia wrote: No. Suicide ganking is balanced on being fairly difficult to coordinate and expensive to pull off (at least without help from the target), and with significant risks involved, against which you have the multitude of tools and ease of evading them if you play smart. So now you are saying that the fact that suicide ganking involves no significant risk or cost and there is no significant penalty for inflicting devastating losses on others within the comfort of high is balanced by the fact that you think its hard? Oh, Tippia. You should hear yourself sometimes. You say there is no significant risk or cost. In that case please name the dozens of organizations that gank to make profit? So far I've only heard 1. And it doesn't make money from ganking but from the sale of intangibles. IE Tears. Players give donations to keep them ganking. If ganking was so easy and profitable there would be dozens of organizations doing it. Since I haven't heard of any others I can only assume that in fact ganking is too hard and needs to be buffed
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 19	Posted - 2014.09.01 10:59:00 - [12] - Quote Grog Aftermath wrote: baltec1 wrote: Ganking has resulted in a good many changes from the introduction of invicible concord to gate/station gun buffs, the barge changes and to the freighter nerf the other month. It is the single most punished activity in EVE and the riskiest after years of nerfs. Doesn't seem very risky to me. You're protected up until the moment you open fire, if you get it right you get your kill. As for losing your ship to CONCORD, there is no risk as it's a given and you've already factored that lose into the gank. Let me repeat. If there is no risk and the cost is so minor why aren't more players doing suicide ganking? The only people who are doing concerted suicide ganking are being paid to do so with an SRP. If your ship is being replaced then of course the cost is trivial. But if it isn't then the cost is prohibitive for the vast majority of players. Hence they don't gank. And apparently the statistics bear this out or did until recently. Ganking was/is at an all time low. We are hearing a lot about ganking not because there is a lot going on but because the ones doing it advertise it on their website.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 20	Posted - 2014.09.01 11:19:00 - [13] - Quote Grog Aftermath wrote: Nitchiu wrote: Grog Aftermath wrote: baltec1 wrote: Ganking has resulted in a good many changes from the introduction of invicible concord to gate/station gun buffs, the barge changes and to the freighter nerf the other month. It is the single most punished activity in EVE and the riskiest after years of nerfs. Doesn't seem very risky to me. You're protected up until the moment you open fire, if you get it right you get your kill. As for losing your ship to CONCORD, there is no risk as it's a given and you've already factored that lose into the gank. Let me repeat. If there is no risk and the cost is so minor why aren't more players doing suicide ganking? The only people who are doing concerted suicide ganking are being paid to do so with an SRP. If your ship is being replaced then of course the cost is trivial. But if it isn't then the cost is prohibitive for the vast majority of players. Hence they don't gank. And apparently the statistics bear this out or did until recently. Ganking was/is at an all time low. We are hearing a lot about ganking not because there is a lot going on but because the ones doing it advertise it on their website. Gankers only have themselves to blame, groups like C.O.D.E. don't help the situation they just bring the issues to the attention of those that can make the changes. CCP runs a business and groups like C.O.D.E. can undermine that business, CCP doesn't want to stop such behaviour as it part of the game, but the more something starts to get out of hand the more the company will have to bring in new controls to keep it under control. Or maybe the gankers didn't spend their time asking for buffs to their playstyle while the 0 PvP crowd did and when they finally started to mount a platform to complain about the rampant anti-PvP sentiment in the game CCP gave them a freighter nerf. Seems like minerbumping is encouraging CCP to stop catering to the anti-PvP crowd rather than pushing them to nerf ganking.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 21	Posted - 2014.09.01 15:36:00 - [14] - Quote NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Remiel Pollard wrote: You have it arse backwards, my friend. It's not up to CCP to do for you what you can do for yourself with equal access to the same tools that everybody else has. it is CCPs job to make the game less of a broken, imbalanced joke of a pvp game that it currently is. Suicide ganking is completely broken in terms of penalty and risk vs reward. Ridiculous to think everything in EVE is as it should be. Nay, the game is constantly being fixed to rid us of horribly imbalanced mechanics like suicide ganking. There once were many derpy clowns saying the same thing about can flipping that you are now saying about suicide ganking. You keep repeating this and I keep repeating that if the risk and cost of suicide ganking was as low as you keep pretending there would be dozens of ganker organizations all over high sec. There are not and the only organization there is has hundreds of billions in funding from various people. They don't even make their money from ganking but from having someone write about it. But you keep ignoring my comments and pretending that you are right. Your right about one thing it is CCPs job to make the game less broken. Only it's broken in making ganking too hard.
Nitchiu EVE University Ivy League 21	Posted - 2014.09.02 14:32:00 - [15] - Quote Personally I'd say the base time should stay the same while the time to press the button would be added to the time it takes for CONCORD to arrive. But still have the ship die in a blaze of CONCORD.