https://extraimago.com/image/wB7Q

Gank attempt happened in 0.5 system, according to game-mechanics 0.5s have 20s response time if fresh spawn, 26s if CONCORD already spawned somewhere else in a system, yet on attached pic we can see CONCORD arriving 2 sec too early. Question to experienced gankers - what sorcery is this? Does it have to do smth with server ticks?

https://extraimago.com/image/wB7Q

Gank attempt happened in 0.5 system, according to game-mechanics 0.5s have 20s response time if fresh spawn, 26s if CONCORD already spawned somewhere else in a system, yet on attached pic we can see CONCORD arriving 2 sec too early. Question to experienced gankers - what sorcery is this? Does it have to do smth with server ticks?

You are a perfect example of how risk vs reward is broken.

Going after a 200 million isk ship in a 1 million isk destroyer.

it is pathetic that the mechanics are broken this badly.

Try a 10 million isk destroyer; regardless isk tanking is a dumb idea, the cost of the tools used to destroy something is irrelevant, nor does it have anything to do with risk and reward.

Besides, who the hell flies a hulk in hisec these days? They're a kill-mail waiting to happen, even more so if he was solo.

Except it wouldn't be said Isk based risk vs reward was stupid if CCP invented a 100 million isk ship that was to fast to be hit by a titan and that could destroy it all by itself.

The cost has everything to do with risk vs reward he risked 9.09 million TOTAL, to kill a multi-hundred million ship.
Same as risk vs reward on Freighters, 10 catalysts vs a multi billion payout. The gankers are taking a minuscule risk compared to the rewards, be they epeen or dropped loot.

As I said its pathetically broken, no wonder so few want to be miners these days.

I love how people throwing out this argument conviently forget the fact that the ganker does not get anywhere close to that number on the killmail. If a ganker kills a normally fit hulk, they will be lucky to loot 10M ISK from the wreck. If they loot their own wreck, that means somewhere around 5M ISK profit, probably less on average. Given you probably can only gank 1 or 2 miners per hour including time to scout them (maybe 3 if they line up like ducks at a shooting gallery for you), it is one of the worst paying "professions" in the game. And even a badly fit Skiff is nowhere near profitable under any circumstances but super-bling fit. So much for that reward, eh?

Same with ganking empty freighters. Sure they get a useless 1B+ killmail, but they just lost hundreds of millions of ISK in ships with zero return. At least poor choices by other players mean you can find freighters that are profitable to shoot regularly, but for miners the bling-fit exhumer is so rare, it can't be considered income, more like winning the lottery.

I'm just glad you are not a game designer. You don't have to imagine very hard how boring and unfun a game would be where expensive ships were immune to attack from cheaper ships. Your mining ship generates tens or hundreds of millions of ISK of resources into the universe each play session while that piddly catalyst can do nothing but try destroy things, or earn a pittance at level 1/2 missions. It seems completely fair that the mining ship would cost more. Risk vs. reward remember? Or does that only apply to the other guy?

EDIT: As to the OP, Tippia experimented with this extensively and it seems correct: http://blog.beyondreality.se/TTK-CONCORD
There maybe a little more variation than -¦1 second though as I think there are several things which happen during the spawning and moving of CONCORD and each of them is subject to some variance depending on the proximity of each event to the server tick. In rare cases that might add up in one direction and result in a significantly faster or slower response, but the vast majority of the time it is always with 2 seconds or so of Tippia's numbers in my experience.

Without responding to all of that. All I will say is that the mechanic is broken.

The miners and freighters are taking all the risk, while the gankers are putting tiny amounts up for risk and reaping the rewards. The mechanic is very broken, freighters and mining ships need more tank or destroyers need to go back to where they were.

Its ridiculous and broken.

Except it wouldn't be said Isk based risk vs reward was stupid if CCP invented a 100 million isk ship that was to fast to be hit by a titan and that could destroy it all by itself.

The cost has everything to do with risk vs reward he risked 9.09 million TOTAL, to kill a multi-hundred million ship.
Same as risk vs reward on Freighters, 10 catalysts vs a multi billion payout. The gankers are taking a minuscule risk compared to the rewards, be they epeen or dropped loot.

As I said its pathetically broken, no wonder so few want to be miners these days.

The point, and issue, is that a Catalyst does a sick amount of dps which it just shouldn't do. Some of the Dessies are balanced just fine, some are terribly imbalanced and the Cat is one of them.

You're quibbling over a rounding error. CCP just buffed freighter EHP 33%. The new Orca is going to get 66% buff to EHP in a few weeks. They are still going to get ganked (well perhaps not the Orca very often if fit for tank). Nothing would fundamentally change if you reduced Catalyst DPS.

Even if CCP nerfs the DPS of the Catalyst 10-20% to put it in line with the other T1 destroyers, it isn't going to change anything other than make no one fly that ship. Aside from the DPS, it is a terrible ship with no range, speed or tank - a true glass cannon.

The reality is that no matter what CCP did, people would be back here complaining that their expensive industrial ship can still be killed by a group of smaller, cheaper combat ships, perhaps now Coercers instead of Catalysts. Nothing is "broken" about this design. It is how it the Eve is suppose to work.

Carebears only seeing highsec and not seeing that there are differences between killed and killing ships all over the game.

Carriers killed by interceptors for example.

ISK tanking is not a good approach to anything.

However, the OP came here to ask a simple question about mechanics, not so idiots can rant and cry all over the place like you're doing here. If you don't know the answer why not STFU, rather than whining about ganking.

With CCP Fozzie's famous statement that CCP like to pair nerfs and buffs to ganking, based on recent and coming changes, it's due a buff fairly soon.

Yes because the 9+ billion destroyed just by CODE ganking this morning is not enough, let alone the rest of the ganks and its only 7:50am

Its a joke.

CODE.'s success is inversely proportional to the IQ of their targets.

If only stupid people stopped flying expensive ships.

And a[sic] absurdly broken mechanic.

OK, we hear you. Now please do one of two things. Either give it a rest or put forward some suggestions as to how CCP could fix what you see as a problem.

Personally I have no objection to people going to the dark side and indulging in suicide ganking, if they want to lose thier security status so be it. When I have valuable cargo to transport I take precautions and use the right ship to suit the threats. Why don't more people work that out?

The point, and issue, is that a Catalyst does a sick amount of dps which it just shouldn't do. Some of the Dessies are balanced just fine, some are terribly imbalanced and the Cat is one of them.

The flaw in your argument is said high damage cat is very easy to pop. They fit zero tank to get that damage.

And a absurdly broken mechanic.

The point, and issue, is that a Catalyst does a sick amount of dps which it just shouldn't do. Some of the Dessies are balanced just fine, some are terribly imbalanced and the Cat is one of them.

... After all the mechanic is clearly broken, I am not the one leaping to the defence of something so ridiculously stupid. A miner spends months saving to buy a hulk, you definitively cannot say the same for gankers in their 9.09 mill ships.

The flaw in your argument is said high damage cat is very easy to pop. They fit zero tank to get that damage.