EVE Search - HighSec Ganking and Appropriate Punishment

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

HighSec Ganking and Appropriate Punishment

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jethro Amar KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 4	Posted - 2015.07.23 10:20:04 - [331] - Quote Lan Wang wrote: Jethro Amar wrote: What i meant was the nearest lowsec concord "prison" station, not just any lowsec. By the way, that 1 jump to uedama could be very hard to get through if somebody decided to put a few instalocking svipuls there. so really you just want to camp a gate and kill shuttles and pods Somehow you shooting pods is elite pvp while antigankers shooting pods is not? camping a gate and shooting unarmed ships is exactly what gankers do. By the way, i live in nullsec and haven't been doing anything in hisec since new year or so. I have no horse in this race.
Lan Wang V I R I I Ineluctable. 1153	Posted - 2015.07.23 10:24:58 - [332] - Quote live in nullsec also so we both horseless EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding \| Digital Design
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1381	Posted - 2015.07.23 10:36:49 - [333] - Quote Jethro Amar wrote: What i meant was the nearest lowsec concord "prison" station, not just any lowsec. By the way, that 1 jump to uedama could be very hard to get through if somebody decided to put a few instalocking svipuls there. pods don't get insta locked before warping... shuttles rarely do then the pod still escapes Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Ima Wreckyou The Conference Elite CODE. 1383	Posted - 2015.07.23 10:43:31 - [334] - Quote Jethro Amar wrote: Lan Wang wrote: Jethro Amar wrote: What i meant was the nearest lowsec concord "prison" station, not just any lowsec. By the way, that 1 jump to uedama could be very hard to get through if somebody decided to put a few instalocking svipuls there. so really you just want to camp a gate and kill shuttles and pods Somehow you shooting pods is elite pvp while antigankers shooting pods is not? camping a gate and shooting unarmed ships is exactly what gankers do. By the way, i live in nullsec and haven't been doing anything in hisec since new year or so. I have no horse in this race. If you can't catch the pods in Highsec, what makes you think you will be able to kill them in lowsec? Also lol at your idea that anti-gankers somehow would camp a gate. You do realize that CONCORD will not protect you there and that we are indeed capable of flying something other than gank Catalysts? the Code ALWAYS wins Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:13:38 - [335] - Quote Seraph IX Basarab wrote: Sounds to me like you're full of **** Lucas. shrug The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:14:47 - [336] - Quote Jethro Amar wrote: it forces the gankers to play the game and interact with others instead of just "undock, warp, f1". Don't be silly. That would mean they need skilled players and not just F1 monkeys following orders. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1251	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:16:05 - [337] - Quote Jethro Amar wrote: They are allowed to shoot you but they can't really do it if they only have 20seconds. for example, if a freighter could undock from jita, enter a "special warp" after 20 seconds and arrive in amarr station after 20 minutes you would scream bloody murder about how "op" hauling is and how they cannot possibly be engaged. Yet that's exactly what gankers do. Undock for 20 seconds in a ship that is already dead - the window of vulnerability is almost nonexistent. By removing you from Uedama after every gank I would give the antigankers a chance to engage you before the gank. :) If you made freighters immune to suicide ganking, you would actually break the game, at least the economy side of things. That is primarily why there is ganking in the game, not as a source of "gud fights". If you want "balanced" PvP you should go do some faction warfare or something. Ganking is pure predator vs. prey game play - the hauler wins by getting their goods safely to their destination, not defeating the gankers in some sort of honourable combat. It's balanced because it is easily avoidable by using numerous strategies and ships CCP has given players to protect themselves. The game for haulers is to decide to spend how much effort to get safely to their destination without sacrificing needlessly time/ISK/effort. The ones that choose wrongly, usually the laziest and greediest of them, are the ones that get caught by the gankers. Working as designed and intended. Jethro Amar wrote: 1. Make more hisec connections between empires. Force gankers to scout and seek targets. More radical: allow freighters to jump to gates like jf would jump to cynos so that they can scout and avoid an obvious trap like uedama. This should be balanced towards avoiding ganks and not faster travel. 2. Fix the bumping. If the gankers aren't ready to attack at a moments notice the target escapes. No bumping for hours. 3. Fix the bumper. It's ridiculous that the bumper is protected by concord. I'd add a ticket option that would apply a killright to the bumper if the bumping resulted in a gank. Let's see how eager they will be to undock those machariels without concord protection. 4. Teleport pods out into lowsec so that they have to travel like everyone else. Make them attackable before the gank happens. 5. Criminal flag should last progressively longer the more one ganks. We have space aids, lets add space syphilis for ganking. 6. Add expensive implants that slow concord response. This will create a variable in ganking equation and some level of risk. Losing catalyst does not constitute risk, as it is already accounted for in the gank. This will also make ganking easier. 1. The choke points are there on purpose. Haulers have to balance the length of the route vs the safety of the route. How does removing that choice make hauler game play any more interesting? And why is this even a problem in the first place? If you just homogenize routes ganking will just become more random - haulers will never know where the gankers are. At least now they can avoid Uedama if they want and take the long route, or just scout when they are around the single choke point. 2. Bumping is easily avoidable. If you don't want to be bumped bring an escort or fly a T2 hauler. Again, you are just removing any decisions to be made on the side of the hauler. Bumping is the freighter's primary weakness, and they become even more overpowered if you make them safe from bumping. You would almost never see anything else but AFK freighters silently plying the trade lanes with that change. 3. Probably just as eager as that freighter pilot to undock without CONCORD protection, that is to say not very. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Why should only freighter pilots benefit from the ease that CONCORD provides people operating in highsec? Because you don't like gankers? But really, this is impossible to code. There is no way flagging bumpers will be 100% reliable and the bad guys are going to find some way to get a kill right on some poor shmuck who bumped into them on the Jita undock. Never going to happen - too much risk of tears. 4. This will have no effect on anything. Gankers will just set their home station to their staging station and death clone back or take gates hoping to be shot and helped along. And even if they are caught they suffer no loss now that clone costs are gone. 5. Increasing the amount of time a player cannot do anything does not engaging gameplay make. If you want to effectively make ganking impossible and hauling perfectly safe, then please just lock out aggressive actions or something so gankers can go do something else in the game than sit bored in a station. 6. The only non-stinker of an idea here. Making CONCORD response times less predictable, and subject to player influence could be interesting. Perhaps deployables that can be attacked and defended that increase or decrease CONCORD response time slightly, or just more randomness in general. That would make ganking less a numbers game, but this would also put some more risk on haulers and miners who might lose a ship to a brave, but lucky ganker playing the odds if CONCORD takes an abnormally long time to show up. The problem is balancing it so that it isn't too much of a buff to gankers in the absence of an opposition, as most of the time there is not a significant and/or competent force to oppose suicide gankers.
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1382	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:18:26 - [338] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Jethro Amar wrote: it forces the gankers to play the game and interact with others instead of just "undock, warp, f1". Don't be silly. That would mean they need skilled players and not just F1 monkeys following orders. quoted for the irony of a space monkey making this statement Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Xeno Szenn SniggWaffe WAFFLES. 5	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:26:46 - [339] - Quote What's wrong with having a lot of accounts? And how does it make it bot asspirant. Multiple accounts are useful for many things. My Thoughts and Views on eve http://xenoszenn.blogspot.com/
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:28:23 - [340] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: as most of the time there is not a significant and/or competent force to oppose suicide gankers. See! Why is there no real opposition? Because Antiganking is a lot of effort for no reward in ships that actually cost an amount people don't want to lose. Meanwhile, ganking is pretty easy, done in cheap ships and in general is pretty rewarding. There should be more opportunities for counters and counter-counters and counter-counter-counters, and ganking should have to field enough to make it worthwhile for antigankers to put some effort and skill into doing it. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!

Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:30:06 - [341] - Quote Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Jethro Amar wrote: it forces the gankers to play the game and interact with others instead of just "undock, warp, f1". Don't be silly. That would mean they need skilled players and not just F1 monkeys following orders. quoted for the irony of a space monkey making this statement :D Don't worry, I see the irony. I'm no fan of F1 monkey activity which is why I supported changes like the drone assist changes and sov changes. Ideally I'd like to see every activity require every participant to think for themselves, but we're a long way off of that. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1382	Posted - 2015.07.23 11:31:06 - [342] - Quote Xeno Szenn wrote: What's wrong with having a lot of accounts? And how does it make it bot asspirant. Multiple accounts are useful for many things. The only guy I know with more alt's then me Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 12:22:56 - [343] - Quote Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Xeno Szenn wrote: What's wrong with having a lot of accounts? And how does it make it bot asspirant. Multiple accounts are useful for many things. The only guy I know with more alt's then me How many accounts is too many? I have 16 active at the mo. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1382	Posted - 2015.07.23 12:50:58 - [344] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Xeno Szenn wrote: What's wrong with having a lot of accounts? And how does it make it bot asspirant. Multiple accounts are useful for many things. The only guy I know with more alt's then me How many accounts is too many? I have 16 active at the mo. I'm confused by your comment here. Why was it made and why does it assume that i think any number is too many? Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:09:57 - [345] - Quote Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Xeno Szenn wrote: What's wrong with having a lot of accounts? And how does it make it bot asspirant. Multiple accounts are useful for many things. The only guy I know with more alt's then me How many accounts is too many? I have 16 active at the mo. I'm confused by your comment here. Why was it made and why does it assume that i think any number is too many? Lol? Same could be said for the original comment and response. Why did he say "what's wrong with having a lot of accounts", then why did you make a point of him having more than you? That prompted me to wonder, "what's 'too many'". You need to calm down fella. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
Noragen Neirfallas Dedicated and Dangerous The Marmite Collective 1382	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:34:57 - [346] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Noragen Neirfallas wrote: Xeno Szenn wrote: What's wrong with having a lot of accounts? And how does it make it bot asspirant. Multiple accounts are useful for many things. The only guy I know with more alt's then me How many accounts is too many? I have 16 active at the mo. I'm confused by your comment here. Why was it made and why does it assume that i think any number is too many? Lol? Same could be said for the original comment and response. Why did he say "what's wrong with having a lot of accounts", then why did you make a point of him having more than you? That prompted me to wonder, "what's 'too many'". You need to calm down fella. He is a friend in game who never posts here I was saying hi pretty much Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 6433	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:45:58 - [347] - Quote I see, still no need to get so hostile :p My humblest apologies for responding to posts in a public thread. /bow The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1698	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:46:13 - [348] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Black Pedro wrote: as most of the time there is not a significant and/or competent force to oppose suicide gankers. See! Why is there no real opposition? Because Antiganking is a lot of effort for no reward in ships that actually cost an amount people don't want to lose. Meanwhile, ganking is pretty easy, done in cheap ships and in general is pretty rewarding. There should be more opportunities for counters and counter-counters and counter-counter-counters, and ganking should have to field enough to make it worthwhile for antigankers to put some effort and skill into doing it. Whilst this is true, it's also demonstrates the paradox. The highsec ruleset DEMANDS they use worthless ships. Throwaway ships are required because of guaranteed loss. If you make them NEED better ships, ships worth shooting, you also then need to leash concord. Or you find a way to make the bounty system simultaneously pay more, but not be exploitable via alts. Good luck there.
Lan Wang V I R I I Ineluctable. 1157	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:49:53 - [349] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Black Pedro wrote: as most of the time there is not a significant and/or competent force to oppose suicide gankers. See! Why is there no real opposition? Because Antiganking is a lot of effort for no reward in ships that actually cost an amount people don't want to lose. Meanwhile, ganking is pretty easy, done in cheap ships and in general is pretty rewarding. There should be more opportunities for counters and counter-counters and counter-counter-counters, and ganking should have to field enough to make it worthwhile for antigankers to put some effort and skill into doing it. because carebears dont want to pay for protection because it affects the amount of isk they earn, i dont make any isk when doing pvp so whats your point? if im moving a capital or a marauder around lowsec/null, i always have a cyno with support on standby, nothing stopping carebears from having support EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding \| Digital Design
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1698	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:54:26 - [350] - Quote Escorts are a) worse than mining for boredom and b) utterly garbage in high sec because you can't shoot first (i.e. you can't kill the warp in alt, or the scanners). There is no amount of isk going that would make me escort in high sec. Don't need to escort in low/null because we use JFs. /shrug

Lan Wang V I R I I Ineluctable. 1159	Posted - 2015.07.23 13:59:19 - [351] - Quote you cant fit fitted battleships and carriers in jf's and not everyone has a jf so scouting for others in null is a thing. you cant shoot first? gankers are -10 they are shoot on site everywhere EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding \| Digital Design
Globby Cohenberg's Ethical Hauling CODE. 127	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:01:48 - [352] - Quote What is it with the assumption of ganking being easier than say, a null engagement? Both sides are effectively just F1-ing on broadcasts. If you get shot you broadcast. No fleet combat is hard or 'engaging' like you say ganking should be, so why should ganking be singled out by your posts by a large margin when it's less than 1% of fleet combat out there? Sounds like an excuse for personal reasons to me imo.
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1254	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:04:04 - [353] - Quote Lan Wang wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Black Pedro wrote: as most of the time there is not a significant and/or competent force to oppose suicide gankers. See! Why is there no real opposition? Because Antiganking is a lot of effort for no reward in ships that actually cost an amount people don't want to lose. Meanwhile, ganking is pretty easy, done in cheap ships and in general is pretty rewarding. There should be more opportunities for counters and counter-counters and counter-counter-counters, and ganking should have to field enough to make it worthwhile for antigankers to put some effort and skill into doing it. because carebears dont want to pay for protection because it affects the amount of isk they earn, i dont make any isk when doing pvp so whats your point? if im moving a capital or a marauder around lowsec/null, i always have a cyno with support on standby, nothing stopping carebears from having support Yup. Escorts are boring, but a necessary cost if you want to move your stuff safely. If you don't want to bring escorts or can't convince someone to do it (i.e. you have no friends) then use a hauling ship that doesn't need them or outsource your hauling to someone who will spend the effort to defend your stuff. That is the game for haulers. Trade-offs and all that. If you don't like the choices on offer, choose another profession. Let's take the time (again) to reflect on the words of a CCP developer who made it quite clear what haulers are expected to do by the designers of this game: CCP Falcon wrote: Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. :)
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1698	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:06:47 - [354] - Quote Did you miss the pertinent part? You cant shoot the neutral guys assisting. So right this second I flew past a code neutral warp in alt ("Hi Perry Rodent!!!") in his venture, could I shoot him if I felt threatened as an escorter? Or shoot him as I KNOW he presents a threat? No, I cannot. Because high sec rules hilariously prevent it as he is lurking in an NPC corp (ironic, for a code alt). Escorting is a joke in high sec beyond a webbing EAF, maybe logi for the armor freighters but even that's a bit of a nonsense. That's it. Nothing else is worth a damn. I would never do it, no-one I know would do it. It's far easier and simler to just not expose yourself in the first place. The limit to "escorting" in highsec is someone webbing you. Scouting is a thing in a fleet, I think you know that is different though. Edit: I should probably be clear, there is nothing can be done about this, it is simply the reality. Edit2: And whilst I'm on the topic, lets not pretend that all gankers are -10.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13769	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:19:29 - [355] - Quote afkalt wrote: Did you miss the pertinent part? You cant shoot the neutral guys assisting. You absolutely can, you just don't want to deal with the consequences the gankers deal with. That should tell you something, but I'd bet cash money that it won't. Quote: So right this second I flew past a code neutral warp in alt ("Hi Perry Rodent!!!") in his venture, could I shoot him if I felt threatened as an escorter? Or shoot him as I KNOW he presents a threat? No, I cannot. Once again, yes, you can. You just don't want to accept the consequences of doing so. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Lan Wang V I R I I Ineluctable. 1161	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:20:08 - [356] - Quote scouting is a thing in a fleet? i move around alot solo and have my own scout so im not bothering anyone else to scout my vargur to a 10/10 8 jumps away, that scout will also light me a covert cyno if i need it. that char will also move around and provide cynos for my carrier, thats nothing to do with fleets its my personal scout having your own scout in nullsec is pretty essential if you plan living there yeah escorting is a joke but so is structure grinding and cloaky camping, if i was moving 10bil worth of cargo i sure as hell aint moving that without some sort of support but hey thats just me. i remember having to log off in a hostile system after losing a battle and only a couple of us survived, corp wouldnt let me log in till they had secured an escort fleet to get it back home safely, might be boring but you do what you gotta do to protect the assets of you and your friends. as for the neutral in a venture, no you cant shoot him but you can shoot the gankers that warp to him or you could bring a ceptor or cheap frig to shoot the venture, and this will also bring concord to the gate. EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding \| Digital Design
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1255	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:24:01 - [357] - Quote afkalt wrote: Did you miss the pertinent part? You cant shoot the neutral guys assisting. Gankers manage to shoot neutrals. I think what you meant to say is that you do not want to shoot the neutrals (the bumpers/scouts) because you do not want to suffer the consequences of that action. I guess criminals do suffer consequences for their actions after all. afkalt wrote: So right this second I flew past a code neutral warp in alt ("Hi Perry Rodent!!!") in his venture, could I shoot him if I felt threatened as an escorter? Or shoot him as I KNOW he presents a threat? No, I cannot. Because high sec rules hilariously prevent it as he is lurking in an NPC corp (ironic, for a code alt). Escorting is a joke in high sec beyond a webbing EAF, maybe logi for the armor freighters but even that's a bit of a nonsense. That's it. Nothing else is worth a damn. I would never do it, no-one I know would do it. It's far easier and simler to just not expose yourself in the first place. The limit to "escorting" in highsec is someone webbing you. Scouting is a thing in a fleet, I think you know that is different though. Edit: I should probably be clear, there is nothing can be done about this, it is simply the reality. There is plenty you can do. You just choose not to pay the cost. A small fleet of logi and quick-locking DPS/ECM can save any freighter and a single webber eliminates 99%+ of the risk of getting bumped in the first place. This has been hashed and rehashed so many times it isn't necessary again, but the main point is that haulers are suppose to be at risk. There are plenty of actions and behaviours you can take to mitigate those risks but CCP has chosen not to give you an I-get-out-of-PvP card to guarantee your safety. That is by design to keep players feeling uncertain and follows the nowhere-is-safe design of the game. Almost every freighter makes it safely to its destination in highsec. A few unlucky/foolish ones are going to explode, but statically, it is an insignificant fraction. A good hauler uses the tools available to increase the chance of being in that first group, but also plans for the chance they end up in the second, more exploded group - don't fly what you can't afford to lose and all.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1698	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:37:43 - [358] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: afkalt wrote: Did you miss the pertinent part? You cant shoot the neutral guys assisting. Gankers manage to shoot neutrals. I think what you meant to say is that you do not want to shoot the neutrals (the bumpers/scouts) because you do not want to suffer the consequences of that action. I guess criminals do suffer consequences for their actions after all. You know perfectly well that an actual escort isn't some half arsed throwaway gank catalyst. Yes, taking a fleet of suicide ships is completely how people escort Look, I never said there were not things you can do to not die, I said that escorting is a joke beyond webbing and we all know that, this is the reality. I don't know how you all missed it, probably too busy frothing at the mouth about freighter ganking and leaping to defend it when a) I never attacked it here and b) the argument was that escorting, beyond webs is POINTLESS. Because it is. You know it, I know it and the haulers know it. Once again, since you all seemed to miss it the first time: It's far easier and simpler to just not expose yourself in the first place.
Globby Cohenberg's Ethical Hauling CODE. 130	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:48:26 - [359] - Quote Let's just say a lot of people (95%) don't take the basic precautions that could prevent 99% of losses. The hauling profession is filled with arrogant entitlement, such as having five freighter alts and not a single webber, then complaining about losing three of them to ganks in the same day.
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 1255	Posted - 2015.07.23 14:55:30 - [360] - Quote afkalt wrote: You know perfectly well that an actual escort isn't some half arsed throwaway gank catalyst. Yes, taking a fleet of suicide ships is completely how people escort I do. But they really should if they want to significantly improve the chance of a valuable shipment arriving. There is nothing stopping them. Eve has rules like any game and if you want to win, you should use them all to your advantage. Choosing not to use some strategies or techniques for whatever reason may make you feel good, but you are still at a disadvantage to the players who use them. And if you tie one hand behind your back you really can't then complain when you lose to them. afkalt wrote: Look, I never said there were not things you can do to not die, I said that escorting is a joke beyond webbing and we all know that, this is the reality. I don't know how you all missed it, probably too busy frothing at the mouth about freighter ganking and leaping to defend it when a) I never attacked it here and b) the argument was that escorting, beyond webs is POINTLESS. Because it is. You know it, I know it and the haulers know it. Well then just web then. But CCP Falcon is not wrong though. If something is that important to you, you should bring a big enough fleet to counter all the risks. If it isn't important enough, well then you are balancing the odds that someone will catch you and destroy you vs the costs of such a escort. Most of the time you will win. Occasionally you will explode. That is the game for haulers. afkalt wrote: Once again, since you all seemed to miss it the first time: It's far easier and simpler to just not expose yourself in the first place. That is a perfectly viable strategy to avoid the predators. Too bad more haulers don't use that strategy but rather prefer the lose-my-10B-ISK-Freighter-while-AFK-and-then-whine-about-it-on-the-forums stratagem.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: 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.