| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Imperator Jora'h
   |
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:28:00 -
[241]
 Originally by: Ki An
It's a proactive defense though, isn't it? I mean, you are free to not scout ahead, but then you can't really whine about being suicide ganked.
As has been mentioned many times in this thread there are a number of ways suicide gankers can hide from a scout and still pull off the gank. In fact if the gankers have half a brain that is precisely what they will do rather than advertise themselves sitting on a gate with 20 Domis.
As for the contention that the gankers risk 400 mil in losses that glosses over the reality. Yes it is 400 mil in total losses but more like 20-25 mil per individual pilot. Not a nice loss but hardly critical.
Compare that to the freighter pilot who is losing a 1+ billion ISK ship. Helluva difference and where risk/reward gets bolloxed up. That is not even counting the cargo. If the gank fails the freighter pilot can easily face a 300 million ISK repair bill because there is no way to repair a freighter's hull except paying a station to do it.
Cap ship PvP pilots frequently make the case that for the multi-billion investment their ship should be exceedingly difficult to kill. Apparently when the ship is a carebear ship that notion goes out the window.
Also, for the idea that the gankers risk not getting any cargo (or crap loot) because of a chance it gets blown up why do you forget that the freighter pilot just lost their cargo? Likely all of it too (chances are poor they will recover anything left in the wreck). Why is this a risk the ganker takes but not an issue for the freighter that lost a billion in ship plus who knows how much cargo? Remember there are two sides to this coin, two sides that suffer loss.
|
Derran
Minmatar
Khumatari Holdings
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:32:00 -
[242]
Originally by: Thoric Frosthammer
Hi sec is hi sec for a reason. If they wanted it to be less safe then 0.0, they wouldn't have made it hi sec. Just because you've found a loophole in the game mechanics, that doesn't somehow magically mean its all ok, and intended. And yes, the use of drones in this case is a loophole in the game mechanics. It evades the heavy jamming concord unleashes. If you deny that, you're just blowing smoke.
The arguments I see here from the pro-gank crowd are the same arguments used to justify privateers' massive war dec loophole. Which was then subsequently closed. So I believe I can safely say that this is not the intended state of things, and that those arguments don't carry a lot of weight. There is MEANT to be a separation between Hi sec and Low sec. If you aren't wardecced, you arent supposed to have to mount a 15 ship escort for your freighter in the middle of 1.0 space.
Anyone who denies that is just trying to defend their particular little exploit, so they can profit from it, not analyzing it objectively. Calling people carebears isn't a valid argument, its simply ad hominem garbage. There are plenty of fools driving freighters through lowsec and 0.0 without escorts. You don't need hi sec too. If they wont give freighters some way to protect themselves, or close the loophole in Concord protection, then they ought to just remove the loot again.
I don't even own a freighter. But when and if I do, I think it'd be nice if i didnt have to call out my entire corp just to run from Ourselaert to Hek. Unless, of course, I was wardecced. But that's a valid game mechanic, unlike the current state of things.
Glad someone said it before I did. I'm sure the people in favor of this 'ganking' as it were will totally ignore a valid point however.
|
Larshus Magrus
Elite Storm Enterprises
Storm Armada
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:34:00 -
[243]
I fly a freighter. I'm a pvper. I'm not in a NPC corp. I primarily use my freighter to aquire minst o build myself ships, and to move my ships around in empire so that I have they scattered at 0.0 entrance points where I need em. I don't afk my freighter cause I want it to get where its going asap so I can get back to the "fun" of the game.
Right now its trivial to gank a freighter with 25 domis. Its NOT trivial to defend a freighter. Come on, the scout thing doesn't work. If you have the ability to get 25 people in domis you sure as hell have the discipline to align and warp.
What will I do? Stop flying my freighter around. Simple. No biggie. What will others do? The same thing.
Lets think of the consequences. Freighters are often times used to move large amounts of low ends out towards 0.0 so stuff can be built. Guess what happens when you can't move low ends or mid ends around. Prioces of ships go up because you can't gather it all at one place "safely". If You think a ship builder is going to use an industrial to cart around trit you are wrong.. wont take the time or effort to do it for the low profit.
ITs the same risk/reward thing. Wont take the risk unless there is a much highter reward. Margin on bs's is perhaps, at best, 5% now. Margin is going to go WAY up. Cost of goods to make is going to go way up. PRoducers will still produce just charge more, or it wont be worth it to produce and they will do something else.
End of day, what will happen is stuff will cost alot more. Do I care? Not really. I'll just jack the price on my stuff that I do sell and don't personally use. If it sells, great, if not I wont sell it. I'm not going to lose money thats for sure.
I'm chuckling cause the people that are doing this are just going to end up paying more for supplies later on. ITs a self balancing game and if the risk/reward ratio isn't there, it WILL balance itself out by causing the price of goods to rise till the ratio is correct.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:34:00 -
[244]
Originally by: Thoric Frosthammer
Hi sec is hi sec for a reason. If they wanted it to be less safe then 0.0, they wouldn't have made it hi sec. Just because you've found a loophole in the game mechanics, that doesn't somehow magically mean its all ok, and intended. And yes, the use of drones in this case is a loophole in the game mechanics. It evades the heavy jamming concord unleashes. If you deny that, you're just blowing smoke.
The arguments I see here from the pro-gank crowd are the same arguments used to justify privateers' massive war dec loophole. Which was then subsequently closed. So I believe I can safely say that this is not the intended state of things, and that those arguments don't carry a lot of weight. There is MEANT to be a separation between Hi sec and Low sec. If you aren't wardecced, you arent supposed to have to mount a 15 ship escort for your freighter in the middle of 1.0 space.
Anyone who denies that is just trying to defend their particular little exploit, so they can profit from it, not analyzing it objectively. Calling people carebears isn't a valid argument, its simply ad hominem garbage. There are plenty of fools driving freighters through lowsec and 0.0 without escorts. You don't need hi sec too. If they wont give freighters some way to protect themselves, or close the loophole in Concord protection, then they ought to just remove the loot again.
I don't even own a freighter. But when and if I do, I think it'd be nice if i didnt have to call out my entire corp just to run from Ourselaert to Hek. Unless, of course, I was wardecced. But that's a valid game mechanic, unlike the current state of things.
Sorry, but your full of it friend.
1: High sec. will hardly be less secure than low sec.
2: here are few (if any) fools flying unescorted freighters around 0.0
3: No matter where you are, you never ever take a load valuable enough to justify a suicide gank without taking suitable precautions... I don't care what you are flying. Whether those precautions consist of experienced scouts out in front, or armor/shield boosting ships along side. 0.0 alliances learned this simple fact long ago and use appropriate teamwork in systems of all security levels. That little tidbit is often the main difference between 0.0 corps/alliances and your archtypical "carebear" corp/alliance... that "why should I have to take precautions or work WITH my corp mates" attitude.
|
Clorthos
Gallente
Tau Ceti Global Production
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:38:00 -
[245]
very simple solution to this
Upgrade the freighter to reflect the other capital ship boosts 9 months ago
AND
allow for fitting slots on a Frieghter, CARGO MODS NOT ALLOWED ( no captial ships transported in highsec via frieghter )... Capital Repper hardeners armor and shield slots, allowing for a cloak slot may be a bit much but I would not mind (no turret slots for mining lasers!!! ) , If you are going to make the ships a target by having them drop loot now, then please allow them to defend themselves as best as possible.
The afkers will still be shot and popped the people manning thier computer while running from point a to point b with billions in assets will have some form of self defense, imune no but surely not the sitting duck that 100+ bored domi pilots with 3 1600mm fitted ships will find.
that and sucicide gankers are going find that insurance will prolly get voided if you get Koncorded ...
|
SigmaPi
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:45:00 -
[246]
Jonathan Xavier made an excelent rebuke on page 8, post 240 (i think).
He summarized all the suggested counters to high-security freighter ganking, and explained why they are not feasable. Also, explain to me the point in even having "high-security" systems if there is no actual security in it? It should be 100% impossible without a concord sanctioned war to kill anything in high-sec, in my openion. I know I will be flamed for that, but that is the point of high-sec, to feel safe...
Anyways, it is my openion that something needs to change to ensure the safety of high-sec. If you want to randomly gank ****, go to low-sec or 0.0... and learn how to actually play the game.
/Siggy
|
Ranger 1
Amarr
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:52:00 -
[247]
Originally by: Jonathan Xavier
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Lord Dynastron
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.
Bingo
Could someone please sumarize the ways to defend a freighter (all of which are listed in this thread) for the morons who can't be assed to read the entire thread?
I can't deal with people like this anymore...
/me goes off to blow something up.
/Ki
Ok - I'll give it a go:
Remote repping BS escort - Not practical due to insane cap usage of remote reps. Most battleships will get one, maybe two cycles before they cap out. Can easily be mitgated by the addition of additional ganking BSes.
Smartbombing BS escort - Dangerous to the escort pilot, and not guaranteed to work
Logistic ship escort - Not everyone has people that can jump in one of these at the drop of a hat.
Yes, it is possible to defend freighters in empire. It is just that it is not realistic to do a full corporation escort operation every time the freighter undocks in 1.0 space.
The big problem here, is that corporations with no active war decs are forced to escort freighters through high security empire the way that they would through 0.0. With the apparent ease of a freighter gank, there is little difference between bringing a freighter through a busy system in empire or 0.0.
As it is right now there are hundreds (or maybe thousands) of mundane frieghter runs done through empire daily, for logistical reasons. Making them all targets will increase the cost of goods for everyone. The risk / reward calculation is totally out of whack for this element of gameplay. A freighter pilot moving simple trade goods or minerals from point A to point B will make only a few percent profit for the several hour trip. While this can be profitable, it can't really afford paying dedicated wingmen for several hours of their time.
So get your corpmates to do it! Right, the eight to ten frieghters some larger corporations have running around empire every day just to keep the wheels of a 0.0 corporation greased would mean the corporation would have to live in empire, just to escort its freighters. It's just not practical to require a 5-6 BS escort fleet on every freighter trip through empire.
Flying a freighter is boring, arduous work for little pay. It literally is the backbone of the eve economy. By prohibiting frieghters from moving bulk materials and construction parts through empire without tedious escort duty, everything will increase in price. Don't grief the pilots.
Lastly, I think being able to get loot from freighters is great. Killing freighters is a huge blow to any corporation. Instead of attacking them in a suicide gank, get them with a wardec. Perhaps put a restriction on ship size for pilots in NPC corps (i.e. NPC corp infrastructure unable to support the undocking procedures and servicing costs of capital ships) would get all freighter pilots into wardeccable corporations. Fine, then if you want to kill a freighter, war dec the corp driving it. Until then, don't make it profitable and easy to kill freighters in high-sec.
As I said before, allowing freighters to trade cargo space for security seems like a fair fix to prevent them from being randomly attacked in high-security space by pirates. If you want to make them a bigger target yet, get freighters out of NPC corporations.
Okay, have it your way. Lets take a look at this non-sense.
Remote repping escort. Is entirely practical. Jonathan obviously has never remote repped anything in his life. Take a look at videos of the last alliance tournament if you have any questions.
It is entirely possible to provide an escort for your freighter when it is carrying items of high enough value to make it a profitable target.
Freighter ganks are hardly easy, and need to be carefully planned. Your high risk area's will be around major hubs, with little risk elsewhere.
Drat, ran out of space.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:57:00 -
[248]
To sum up, most of his points deal with daily freighter traffic being at risk. It won't of course, it would not be profitable enough to warrant an attack.
You can bet your bottom dollar though that 0.0 alliances moving their HIGH VALUE cargo via freighter will indeed have it escorted (effectively I might add) when going through any high risk area (Major trade hubs).
Sorry, but this post scores a zero for actually having any facts to back it up. He obviously has had little experience with his subject matter.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 17:59:00 -
[249]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Sorry, but your full of it friend.
1: High sec. will hardly be less secure than low sec.
2: here are few (if any) fools flying unescorted freighters around 0.0
3: No matter where you are, you never ever take a load valuable enough to justify a suicide gank without taking suitable precautions... I don't care what you are flying. Whether those precautions consist of experienced scouts out in front, or armor/shield boosting ships along side. 0.0 alliances learned this simple fact long ago and use appropriate teamwork in systems of all security levels. That little tidbit is often the main difference between 0.0 corps/alliances and your archtypical "carebear" corp/alliance... that "why should I have to take precautions or work WITH my corp mates" attitude.
I've done 0.0 runs and indeed a freighter should NEVER go below 0.5 without a hefty escort. Of course you know the cargo ship of choice in 0.0 is now a carrier, not a freighter. Those times when a freighter is used are relatively few and far between. Generally a massive haul is organized with several freighters and a massive escort fleet. Done once a month or so no biggie and even kind of fun.
What you are missing is the volumes of goods that need to be moved around Empire are FAR higher than needed in 0.0. Ever try running a serious production line? One of the most difficult aspects (or at least time consuming) is maintaining a supply of mats for its operation. It is a near constant effort. Expecting to find 5+ mates to guard your ship day-in and day-out is very difficult...even for massive industrial corps.
As for not putting enough material in cargo on a freighter to keep it below ganking profitability is terrible. It is trivially easy to cross that threshold with a hold full of most anything beyond Tritanium. You are essentially saying do not use a freighter for its intended purpose.
I do not understand the PvPers hatred of "carebears". I'd be curious to know how many of these PvPers who ooze sarcasm have flown a freighter. Not just flown one but had to fly one daily for weeks. A freighter they themselves dropped their own 1 billion ISK on and then emptied their wallet of another 2 billion for a cargo run. Freighters were not AFK ISK printing machines. They are a tool. Carebears often put in a great deal of work to be traders or builders. The moving stuff around part is just the mechanics...the effort comes before you ever fill the cargo hold and I'll stack up their effort at playing EVE against a Mothership camping a low sec gate and smartbombing shuttles anyday.
And once again with the socut thing...they are easily bypassed by a semi-savvy gank group.
|
Jonathan Xavier
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:01:00 -
[250]
Edited by: Jonathan Xavier on 01/05/2007 17:58:52
Ranger 1,
First off, I have remote repaired things. My point focused around the infeasibility of having 8 remote reppers on a single BS, as had been suggested earlier in the thread. Most battleships can support running one large repairer for some time, supplemented by NOS. However, none can run 8 for more than a cycle or two as I pointed out in my previous post.
Secondly, keep in mind that most freighters only fly between hub systems (the "higher danger" areas as you put it). It is simply not profitable to fly your freighter through backwater systems. Also, to contend that you shouldn't put anything of value in the freighter is not very well thought out either. The freighter itself is worth nearly 1 billion isk. A 400M loss by griefers or enemies still puts them 600M ahead of the game attacking an EMPTY freigher. If the goal is not to make personal profit, but rather to inflict financial damage on a corporation or alliance the metric changes substantially.
To say that I don't have much experiance in the matter only highlights your own ignorance.
|
Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:07:00 -
[251]
Someone said that freighters should not be allowed in NPC corps. If that were to happen I'd be in favor of giving freighters any amount of slots they want... hell, give them large hybrid turret bonuses for all I care. Bottom line is, they are no longer invulnerable, and you don't have to suicide them in order to kill them.
Johnatan said in his last post that it's not feasable for freighters to operate away from major trade hubs. Maybe you should at least try. Set up an operation where a freighter takes the cargo to a less frequented system. There, smaller vessels take over, ferrying the cargo to it's destinations. This way you sa***uard the cargo, you involve more people (a good thing), and you minimize the route which the freighter and its escorts have to travel.
/Ki
Remember, kids:
Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"! |
Jonathan Xavier
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:13:00 -
[252]
Originally by: Ki An
Someone said that freighters should not be allowed in NPC corps. If that were to happen I'd be in favor of giving freighters any amount of slots they want... hell, give them large hybrid turret bonuses for all I care. Bottom line is, they are no longer invulnerable, and you don't have to suicide them in order to kill them.
Actually, that was me who suggested it. Go figure.
Originally by: Ki An
Johnatan said in his last post that it's not feasable for freighters to operate away from major trade hubs. Maybe you should at least try. Set up an operation where a freighter takes the cargo to a less frequented system. There, smaller vessels take over, ferrying the cargo to it's destinations. This way you sa***uard the cargo, you involve more people (a good thing), and you minimize the route which the freighter and its escorts have to travel.
/Ki
Ki, you'd be talking about nearly 100 industrial trips to off load a single frieighter. There's a reason freighters are used in the first place, and why it was such a big deal that freighters could interface with POS structures. They have a massive cargo bay. No, it's not a good thing to involve 100 people (on each end) plus 5-10 in the middle just to move 90M units of trit from Oursulert to Hek.
|
welsh wizard
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:14:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.
Would remote repping not work?
|
Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:16:00 -
[254]
Originally by: welsh wizard
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.
Would remote repping not work?
Apparently it's too much of an effort.
/Ki
Remember, kids:
Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"! |
Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:19:00 -
[255]
Originally by: Jonathan Xavier
Ki, you'd be talking about nearly 100 industrial trips to off load a single frieighter. There's a reason freighters are used in the first place, and why it was such a big deal that freighters could interface with POS structures. They have a massive cargo bay. No, it's not a good thing to involve 100 people (on each end) plus 5-10 in the middle just to move 90M units of trit from Oursulert to Hek.
Fair enough, might be unfeasable. Still, do you really have to take a freighter load into a trade hub each and every time? I mean, what are you carrying? Dozens of ships? Couldn't you just sell them outside the trade hub, but in the same region?
/Ki
Remember, kids:
Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"! |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:19:00 -
[256]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: welsh wizard
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.
Would remote repping not work?
Apparently it's too much of an effort.
/Ki
Drop 1.1 billion on a freighter. Put 2 billion in cargo in it and make a 20j run. Then do that daily for two weeks.
Get back to me on how often you pull together 5+ mates to guard you.
|
Ki An
Gallente
The Really Awesome Players
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:21:00 -
[257]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Drop 1.1 billion on a freighter. Put 2 billion in cargo in it and make a 20j run. Then do that daily for two weeks.
Get back to me on how often you pull together 5+ mates to guard you.
You go ahead and do it without taking any security measures, and then get back to us and tell us how many times you where suicide ganked.
/Ki
Remember, kids:
Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"! |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:23:00 -
[258]
Originally by: Ki An
Couldn't you just sell them outside the trade hub, but in the same region?
Same reason merchants IRL life congreate in malls and downtown areas. Sure you could open a shop in the boonies and get some sales but you will get FAR more sales at the trade hub. When margins are low it is all about volume.
|
welsh wizard
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:24:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: welsh wizard
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.
Would remote repping not work?
Apparently it's too much of an effort.
/Ki
Drop 1.1 billion on a freighter. Put 2 billion in cargo in it and make a 20j run. Then do that daily for two weeks.
Get back to me on how often you pull together 5+ mates to guard you.
This is a valid point. :/
It's a difficult situation tbh, I'm definitely not of the opinion that hi-sec ganks are exploits. As much as possible should be left to the players imagination without imposing a bunch of rules that are only in place to keep a certain spectrum of players happy.
It shouldn't be considered an exploit but perhaps there should be some way other than massive escorts to defend against freighter ganks. What is reasonable though?
|
welsh wizard
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:25:00 -
[260]
Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/05/2007 18:23:25
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ki An
Couldn't you just sell them outside the trade hub, but in the same region?
Same reason merchants IRL life congreate in malls and downtown areas. Sure you could open a shop in the boonies and get some sales but you will get FAR more sales at the trade hub. When margins are low it is all about volume.
But is this reason enough to exempt you from risk in a game where anything goes? I am definitely pro isk sink, ie,, there needs to be many more ways to slow the isk making in Eve than there are currently, invention was a start but the Eveconomy is still in trouble.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:25:00 -
[261]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: welsh wizard
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem isn't that freighters can be killed, the problem is that they can't be defended.
Would remote repping not work?
Apparently it's too much of an effort.
/Ki
Drop 1.1 billion on a freighter. Put 2 billion in cargo in it and make a 20j run. Then do that daily for two weeks.
Get back to me on how often you pull together 5+ mates to guard you.
Been there, done that. We don't run our freighters unprotected where there is a good chance of a gank. You either have a corp that delivers (pardon the pun) or you don't.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:27:00 -
[262]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Drop 1.1 billion on a freighter. Put 2 billion in cargo in it and make a 20j run. Then do that daily for two weeks.
Get back to me on how often you pull together 5+ mates to guard you.
You go ahead and do it without taking any security measures, and then get back to us and tell us how many times you where suicide ganked.
/Ki
Nice dodge.
You are suggesting that 5+ guard squads are a simple matter and implying freighter pilots are just too lazy to be bothered. I am merely pointing out that before you make claims you should try it yourself.
As for me getting ganked you are correct that MOST times I won't. But with 3+ billion on the line (mnost of which is not insurable) it really only takes once to screw me over in EVE for months. Perhaps you are wealthy enough to shrug off a 3 billion total loss but I am not.
It's like playing Russian Roulette. Even if there was only a 1:100 chance of you getting "unlucky" would you play?
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:28:00 -
[263]
Edited by: SiJira on 01/05/2007 18:24:12
i have got a great suggestion
make freighters not allowed to be flown in npc corps !
then you can war dec known freighter pilots and everyone can hug and care 
|
trouser boy
The Eve Pacification Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:28:00 -
[264]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Drop 1.1 billion on a freighter. Put 2 billion in cargo in it and make a 20j run. Then do that daily for two weeks.
Get back to me on how often you pull together 5+ mates to guard you.
You go ahead and do it without taking any security measures, and then get back to us and tell us how many times you where suicide ganked.
/Ki
Nice dodge.
You are suggesting that 5+ guard squads are a simple matter and implying freighter pilots are just too lazy to be bothered. I am merely pointing out that before you make claims you should try it yourself.
As for me getting ganked you are correct that MOST times I won't. But with 3+ billion on the line (mnost of which is not insurable) it really only takes once to screw me over in EVE for months. Perhaps you are wealthy enough to shrug off a 3 billion total loss but I am not.
It's like playing Russian Roulette. Even if there was only a 1:100 chance of you getting "unlucky" would you play?
Don't fly what you can't afford to lose?
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:32:00 -
[265]
Originally by: welsh wizard
Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/05/2007 18:23:25
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ki An
Couldn't you just sell them outside the trade hub, but in the same region?
Same reason merchants IRL life congreate in malls and downtown areas. Sure you could open a shop in the boonies and get some sales but you will get FAR more sales at the trade hub. When margins are low it is all about volume.
But is this reason enough to exempt you from risk in a game where anything goes? I am definitely pro isk sink, ie,, there needs to be many more ways to slow the isk making in Eve than there are currently, invention was a start but the Eveconomy is still in trouble.
I totally agree that this should NOT exempt anyone from risk. While I am not a big fan of suicide ganks I accept them.
I am NOT arguing for invulnerable freighters and frankly they should drop their loot. I merely want some reasonable methods to look after their safety. Note "reasonable". While definitely subjective and open to debate I disagree that 5 battleship guards to take a freighter everywhere it goes as reasonable.
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:33:00 -
[266]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Okay, what harm would it do to you all if freighters have some defensive slots like 0/3/3 for hi/med/low?
because it would boost a ship already powerful to shrug off 19 battleships, something no ship less than a mothership can do.
Invulnerable freighters would be a terrible thing for the game.
O RLY?
The last I check freighters could tank 19 battleships because they got griefed in high sec. I guessed motherships could tank 19 battleships if they were griefed in high secs because they can turn on 3 armor reps and have resists mods in their defensive slots.
---------
Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Kali is for KArebearLIng.
I 100% agree with Avon.
Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game. |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:35:00 -
[267]
Originally by: trouser boy
Don't fly what you can't afford to lose?
Oh, I'd survive as a player losing my ship and cargo like that but it would sting something fierce. The ship loss I could manage (suck but manage). The uninsured cargo is a lot more difficult. I'd get by and keep going but it would definitely throw a serious wrench in things.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:37:00 -
[268]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 01/05/2007 18:38:59
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: welsh wizard
Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/05/2007 18:23:25
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Ki An
Couldn't you just sell them outside the trade hub, but in the same region?
Same reason merchants IRL life congreate in malls and downtown areas. Sure you could open a shop in the boonies and get some sales but you will get FAR more sales at the trade hub. When margins are low it is all about volume.
But is this reason enough to exempt you from risk in a game where anything goes? I am definitely pro isk sink, ie,, there needs to be many more ways to slow the isk making in Eve than there are currently, invention was a start but the Eveconomy is still in trouble.
I totally agree that this should NOT exempt anyone from risk. While I am not a big fan of suicide ganks I accept them.
I am NOT arguing for invulnerable freighters and frankly they should drop their loot. I merely want some reasonable methods to look after their safety. Note "reasonable". While definitely subjective and open to debate I disagree that 5 battleship guards to take a freighter everywhere it goes as reasonable.
They wouldn't have to go everywhere the freighter goes, only into high risk area's (or area's that a scout has determined to be high risk).
In the example offered above where the freighter is carrying 2 billion in goods you need to remember, this freighter will likely NOT be a target in the first place. At least half of the goods will be lost in the explosion, leaving perhaps 1 billion. That would not be sufficient incentive for any profit oriented group to suicide their Domi's and equipment for... revenge oriented may be a different story but that is not the point of this discussion.
Lets say 25 Domi pilots could pull it off. They invest the time necessary to get set up, organized, and find you. 1 billion/25= 40mil apiece. Would you suicide your ship for 40mil taking the loss of ship (- the difference you would get on your insurance you paid for), loss of modules and drones, and loss of standings into account? I don't know very many who would.
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:39:00 -
[269]
Ki An, people killers like you would never listen to the little crafters like us. Maybe because you refuse to acknowledge a problem and see the side of the little people. You people killers have everything in eVe, null sec, low sec and high sec. The little people like us do not have those luxury. If you were to spend weeks flying freighters, I would guess you would change your mind.
Keep an open mind. 
---------
Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Kali is for KArebearLIng.
I 100% agree with Avon.
Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game. |
Jonathan Xavier
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 18:39:00 -
[270]
The reason I maintain that remote repping is not a viable counter is because people suggested that a BS with 8 remote reps can mitigate 5 Domi's damage. The problem with that is that a BS can't sustain that kind of rep. Instead you'd need a fleet of 20-40 BSs with 1-2 remote reppers each or a smaller number with 3 (if the cap use makes sense). The point myself and others has been making is that it is unreasonable to force freighter pilots to assemble a fleet that size to simply undock in Jita, Hek or Rens.
People also need to consider that freighter ganking can be done for reasons other than personal profit. If an enemy decided to start take down an empty empty freighter, they would inflict 600M isk worth of net financial damage.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |