EVE Search - Suicide ganking is FINE. It's YOU who's broken.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Suicide ganking is FINE. It's YOU who's broken.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:04:00 - [1] Let's see... SCENARIO ONE: You are a brand new character. You just bought an industrial and fit it, and you spent half a mil ISK doing it. You load it with 50 mil worth of goods and you go on your way to sell them 10-20 minutes later for 55 mil ISK. In a suicide-gank free world, you just made 5 mil with minimal effort. Would you have bought a mining frigate, it would have taken you the better part of THREE TO FIVE HOURS do do this. Would you have bought a combat craft, pretty much the same, maybe say TWO hours. Does that sound normal ? Well, this is where the SUICIDE GANKERS come in. Your 50+ mil cargo almost guarantees them a 10-15 mil ISK income. But since you fly a crappy ship, even a cheaply-fit 5 mil ISK cruiser can do it, so, why SHOULDN'T they blow you up ? You were greedy, you risked, you lost. All is fine. SCENARIO TWO: You are a slightly older character. You still haven't bothered upgrading your industrial's protection, and instead of buying tanking, shielding and plating for it, you chose to make it able to carry much more goods. It does cost you a lot more, but the ship is just as flimsy as ever. You carry up to 150 or even 200 mil in your hold. You freaking deserve to get ganked! SCENARIO THREE: You got a bit smarter this time. Lo and behold, you tanked your hauler to a serious degree. You might not be able to carry much more as originally, heck, you might even carry less. But then again, you're much harder to catch, and much harder to destroy. Nobody bothers suicide-ganking you, or they FAIL to do it before CONCORD shows up, heavily underestimating you, thinking you're the guy from scenario one or two. GOOD FOR YOU ! You deserve to survive ! SCENARIO FOUR: You're an older character now. Would you have gone the mining route, you would be pulling in up to 5 mil ISK per hour in a cheapish Covetor. Or you could be easily running L3 missions in a decently-fit battlecruiser for about the same income. But, you decided to go the hauler way. You are not THAT stupid anymore, so you bought a transport ship. Sadly, you are not smart enough, and you make the same mistake as scenario two. You carry a lot of goods, you might be a bit harder to destroy, but then again, you're worth killing. You die. Sorry bub, maybe next time ? SCENARIO FIVE: Learning from scenario four, you got a blockade runner this time. You might carry less, but fit for speed and agility, nobody catches you. You might make less cash per run, but at least you're reasonably safe. GOOD FOR YOU ! SCENARIO SIX: Now you got much bigger plans and a much larger wallet. Would you have been a mission-runner, you might be flying a half-decent battleship or a very specialized battlecruiser, raking in 15 mil per hour running L4s leisurely. Or you could be making up to 15 mil per hour mining with your buddies in a Hulk. But no, you're a hauler/trader... so you buy a freighter. Since, well, you can't fit it at all, you decide that carrying most of your wordly possesions in it for trading purposes might be a good idea, since it also moves so hard, you're not patient enough to make more than just one trip. BANG down you go in a blaze of glory eventually... I mean, come on, moving 3 bil worth of goods for a potential 100 mil profit at arrival one hour later COULDN'T have been a good idea, now could it ? You again DESERVE to die. SCENARIO SEVEN: Well, apparently you're not flat broke and you learned your lesson. This time, you only fly with max 1 bil worth of goods in your freighter. You pick your goods more carefully, you spend more time prospecting the markets and sit at the keyboard to actually MAKE the jumps. You arrive at your destination within 40 minutes, and make a wuick 15 mil on the sales. GOOD FOR YOU, YOU FINALLY GOT THE HANG OF IT ! ____ Translation ? Suicide ganking is FINE ! It is you, the hauler, who's either GREEDY, stupid, or both. Or just VERY unlucky. 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.
1717 A Dark Cloud Unaffiliated	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:10:00 - [2] Pretty much. Although this issue has been posted on way too many times in general the past few days/weeks w/e, the op lays it out nicely. eve-online.com
Johli AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:11:00 - [3] Are you available?
Cpt Fina Mutually Assured Distraction	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:12:00 - [4] Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO SIX: Freighters are borked tbqh. It's not suiciders fault, it's not the traders fault. The ship is borked.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:14:00 - [5] Originally by: Cpt Fina Freighters are borked tbqh. It's not suiciders fault, it's not the traders fault. The ship is borked. Scenario seven 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.
Cpt Fina Mutually Assured Distraction	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:19:00 - [6] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cpt Fina Freighters are borked tbqh. It's not suiciders fault, it's not the traders fault. The ship is borked. Scenario seven The freighter can't haul anything worth more than 1,000 ISK/m3 at full load. The freighter can only haul 1,05 times its own worth. The freighterpilot can do next to nothing on his own to modify his ship to counter a percieved threat unlike any other ship in the game bar shuttles. Escorts are often not financially viable. Multiple runs are often not financially viable.
Mogren CCCP INC	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:20:00 - [7] Agreed. It is people who go AFK and move around millions in shuttles, frigs, or untanked ships who complain. The only people that die to suicide gankers are those who leave themselves open to be ganked. The game provides enough countermeasures for the smart player to avoid it. The ones who do die are the equivalent of people walking around outside a police station waving 24k solid gold bars in the air. Of course someone will come to their aid if they get mugged, but that wont stop them from getting mugged in the first place. Be discreet. Protect your investments. Stop complaining. Everything in this game is risk versus reward, even in high sec.
Lance Fighter Safe Haven North Star Confederation	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:28:00 - [8] Err... In my game, I quit after scenario 2 and moved onto missions. Much better income, much less thought Ive noticed that 99.9% of people on these forums have a signature. If you are one of the 0.1% that doesnot have a sig, copy this into your sig, and display your defiance towards people with sigs.
Franga NQX Innovations	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:34:00 - [9] Originally by: Cpt Fina Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO SIX: Freighters are borked tbqh. It's not suiciders fault, it's not the traders fault. The ship is borked. Care to detail why? Or is this just a massive sweeping generalisation of some type? Originally by: Rachel Vend ... with 100% reliability in most cases ...
Franga NQX Innovations	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:35:00 - [10] Originally by: Cpt Fina Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Cpt Fina Freighters are borked tbqh. It's not suiciders fault, it's not the traders fault. The ship is borked. Scenario seven The freighter can't haul anything worth more than 1,000 ISK/m3 at full load. The freighter can only haul 1,05 times its own worth. The freighterpilot can do next to nothing on his own to modify his ship to counter a percieved threat unlike any other ship in the game bar shuttles. Escorts are often not financially viable. Multiple runs are often not financially viable. I see it was a massive sweeping generalisation. Because everyone must use freighters this way. Good job. Originally by: Rachel Vend ... with 100% reliability in most cases ...

Barek Ironfist eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:43:00 - [11] you missed scenario eight After making a few freightor runs, and then snuffing it you decide to upgrade to a jump freightor and become immune to anything but a vast number of suicide ganking battleships. Barek
Cpt Fina Mutually Assured Distraction	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:48:00 - [12] Edited by: Cpt Fina on 27/03/2008 02:48:32 Originally by: Franga I see it was a massive sweeping generalisation. Because everyone must use freighters this way. Good job. What would be the point of bringing up any complaint about any ship in this game if the fact that everyone don't use the ships in the same way obsoletes the argument? Good job.
Oftherocks Of The Rocks Corp	Posted - 2008.03.27 02:55:00 - [13] lol, great post! only real problem I have is hictors can always get your blockade runner, but then it is very rare that a hictor is involved in a suicide gank.
Ankhesentapemkah Aliastra	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:27:00 - [14] Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO ONE: ... You load it with 50 mil worth of goods and you go on your way to sell them 10-20 minutes later for 55 mil ISK. In a suicide-gank free world, you just made 5 mil with minimal effort. Would you have bought a mining frigate, it would have taken you the better part of THREE TO FIVE HOURS do do this. Would you have bought a combat craft, pretty much the same, maybe say TWO hours. Does that sound normal ? ... Ever heard of market PVP? There is plenty of risk in trading. Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO TWO: You are a slightly older character. You still haven't bothered upgrading your industrial's protection, and instead of buying tanking, shielding and plating for it, you chose to make it able to carry much more goods. Ban cargo expanders, the only valid modules are tanking modules! Oh and ban officer fittings too. If you fit those, you deserve to be suicide ganked too as your ship potentially drops more than it costs to kill it! Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO THREE: Lo and behold, you tanked your hauler to a serious degree. ... heavily underestimating you, thinking you're the guy from scenario one or two. ... Until everyone 'gets smart' and they do not get underestimated anymore. The gankers adapt and put in a little bit more effort, and the victims are back to square 1. Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO FOUR: Sadly, you are not smart enough, and you make the same mistake as scenario two. You carry a lot of goods, you might be a bit harder to destroy, but then again, you're worth killing. Translation: forget about using more than a fraction of your freighters cargo capacity, because stuffing any more in it and you deserve to get blown up! Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO FIVE: Learning from scenario four, you got a blockade runner this time. You might carry less, but fit for speed and agility, nobody catches you. You might make less cash per run, but at least you're reasonably safe. GOOD FOR YOU ! Yeah ban those freighters and industrialist good-for-nothing ships, blockade runners are the only valid strategy. Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO SIX: You again DESERVE to die. Agreed in this scenario. Originally by: Akita T SCENARIO SEVEN: Well, apparently you're not flat broke and you learned your lesson. This time, you only fly with max 1 bil worth of goods in your freighter. You pick your goods more carefully, you spend more time prospecting the markets and sit at the keyboard to actually MAKE the jumps. You arrive at your destination within 40 minutes, and make a wuick 15 mil on the sales. GOOD FOR YOU, YOU FINALLY GOT THE HANG OF IT ! And then you find that someone has undercut your prices and you lose a lot of time and/or money. Originally by: Akita T Translation ? Suicide ganking should be possible, but there should be more consequences to it. Suicide ganking is too easy to accomplish, has too little consequence, and is profitable too quickly. For every ounce of effort the gankers put in it, it takes ten to 'defend' against their actions. Most annoying of all, there hardly is a way to pre-emptively undertake action against them, unless you count concord pre-summon tactics, as even wardecs are not always possible/an option. Also, people often forget that haulers take a risk already when they purchase the goods. --- Take Care is the CSM party for the free and independant players! Contact us and let us relay your ideas to CCP! Visit our Campaign Website
Ava Santiago AAC	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:29:00 - [15] Let's see... SCENARIO ONE: I buy materials on the market to make ships to sell. Moving the materials to my factory I get blown up. I stop making ships or add the loss to the amount I charge. SCENARIO TWO: I buy salvage materials to make rigs. Moving the materials to my factory I get blown up. I stop making rigs or add the loss to the amount I charge. SCENARIO THREE: .. I stop making X or add the loss to the amount I charge. ALL and I mean ALL of my incurred costs will be passed on to my customers. If my costs exceed current market prices I cease production and wait for prices to rise. Suicide ganking looks profitable - and it is short term - but it's a really bad idea as the potential long term risks are things like vanishing markets, lower supply levels, and needing to personally go mine the minerals to build your replacement ship. I can't force you to stop being an idiot. But I can make you pay through the nose for the privilege.
Arian Serpintus Auroran PeaceKeepers Northern Regions Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:44:00 - [16] There are plenty of strategies in this game that are legit and smart. Setting up a gank ship with T1 crap and insuring it is not one of them, regardless of the argument. The ganker profits, even though they were "caught" and Concorded, while committing a crime are ridiculous. Why is CCP subsidizing gank ships? That is the primary easy question. Without making this more then what it is, why does CCP pay gank pilots for their loss?
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:47:00 - [17] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Suicide ganking should be possible, but there should be more consequences to it. And what would be your ESTIMATES of how much it SHOULD cost to suicide-gank each of the mentioned fits in the OP ? Quote: Suicide ganking is too easy to accomplish, has too little consequence, and is profitable too quickly. ONLY when the one being ganked carries too much value in his cargo comparative to the firepower it takes to take him out. Quote: For every ounce of effort the gankers put in it, it takes ten to 'defend' against their actions. Most annoying of all, there hardly is a way to pre-emptively undertake action against them, unless you count concord pre-summon tactics, as even wardecs are not always possible/an option. Hey, here's a novel idea : carry less value per trip, and make your ship harder to destroy. Quote: Also, people often forget that haulers take a risk already when they purchase the goods. I trade. I almost never haul. One does not necessarily imply the other. Originally by: Ava Santiago ALL and I mean ALL of my incurred costs will be passed on to my customers. If my costs exceed current market prices I cease production and wait for prices to rise. And that's why YOU will not be making a sale, while the one that took precautions NOT to lose goods to suicide-gankers will, because he'll always be undercutting you. Quote: Suicide ganking looks profitable - and it is short term - but it's a really bad idea as the potential long term risks are things like vanishing markets, lower supply levels, and needing to personally go mine the minerals to build your replacement ship. I see no "dwindling supply". Heck, even with the massive fuss about the Goons and highsec miners, mineral prices didn't even spike to the levels back when "cheap trit from reprocessing coupling arrays" was removed. Quote: I can't force you to stop being an idiot. But I can make you pay through the nose for the privilege. I can't stop you from losing money because you're greedy and want to haul it all in one trip, I can only just refuse to buy your overpriced goods. Somebody else that's less careless WILL be selling it cheaper soon enough. 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.
Arian Serpintus Auroran PeaceKeepers Northern Regions Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:47:00 - [18] Edited by: Arian Serpintus on 27/03/2008 03:49:09 And to those that reply that not insuring such losses would chase new players away, give me a ***** break. New players aren't setting up gank squads, and if they are, ** em, we don't need em... The one's setting up gank squads are using throw away alts or free trials. That in and of itself should end this discussion.
Spacy Tracy Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:48:00 - [19] Edited by: Spacy Tracy on 27/03/2008 03:49:11 Originally by: Akita T drivel You know, I think I've finally placed you. You're the Big Lebowski. Lots of bluster, lots of self-importance, no real substance - it's all a facade. Deep down inside, you would admit to yourself that the real reason you're saying all this crap is because your particular gameplay style is not vulnerable to suicide ganking. Or is so removed from it as to make the odds vanishingly small. As such, you can point out to those who are ridiculously vulnerable and say "I am better than you", and congratulate yourself on being part of the in crowd that gets it. But that's all it is. If you were a miner and got repeatedly ganked by Goons, you'd be singing a different tune.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:50:00 - [20] Edited by: Akita T on 27/03/2008 03:54:41 Originally by: Arian Serpintus There are plenty of strategies in this game that are legit and smart. Setting up a gank ship with T1 crap and insuring it is not one of them, regardless of the argument. The ganker profits, even though they were "caught" and Concorded, while committing a crime are ridiculous. Why is CCP subsidizing gank ships? That is the primary easy question. Without making this more then what it is, why does CCP pay gank pilots for their loss? The game is structured in such a way that (supposedly) your potential revenue through "manual labor" (hauling being one of them) should be dependant on your investment (in this case, the ship doing the hauling), assumingyou know what you're doing. The "checks and balances" are there to STOP you from acquiring too much of a profit for too little of an effort, either mentally or as sheer time spent. The PRICE the suicide-gankers have to pay for your kill have to be balanced with the amount of risk you take in that ship. Make suicide-ganking too cheap, everybody will be shooting down freighters carrying next to nothing left and right. This is not happening yet, so sucide ganking is NOT too cheap. Make it too expensive, and everybody will be carrying hundreds of millions worth of goods in untanked T1 haulers. Which is definetely NOT good, you don't want a handfull of people monopolizing ALL what's left of the "transport industry" in EVE. Yes, there is such a thing. Originally by: Spacy Tracy If you were a miner and got repeatedly ganked by Goons, you'd be singing a different tune. If I was a miner (I hate mining because it's boring, but let's say I would have been one), I would have gotten ganked by goons at most ONCE, if not at all. Quote: Deep down inside, you would admit to yourself that the real reason you're saying all this crap is because your particular gameplay style is not vulnerable to suicide ganking. I HAVE hauled valuable cargo through "dangerous" highsec, I HAVE been the target of ATTEMPTED sucide ganks, yet so far I never lost a single hauler in HIGHSEC. So yeah, I admit it. "My particular gameplay style is not vulnerable to suicide ganking". It's called "not greedy, and smart". 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.

El'Niaga Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:55:00 - [21] The only problem I have is there is no risk to the kamikaze pilot in current game terms. Time and time again we've heard this is a risk vs reward game but when insurance pays the criminal enough to get another ship and refit it for his actions there is no risk. Therefore the simple solution is to remove insurance payouts generated while the pilot has a criminal flag. This would not prevent someone from suiciding but would make it such that there is some risk. It means that you'd have to pick your targets more carefully if you want to make a profit. In addition baiting concord should be labeled an exploit or regardless of how many times concord is called in a system have them instantly respond. This would help to reestablish the game balance intended by risk vs reward, while still allowing suicide attacks.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:57:00 - [22] Originally by: El'Niaga The only problem I have is there is no risk to the kamikaze pilot in current game terms. Why does the GANKER have to have an even "risk vs reward" ratio ? What's wrong if ONLY the victim's risk-vs-rewards ratio is "just right" ? For all you know, the suicide-gankers are merely performing a public service, keeping greedy, careless people in line by spanking them hard. The "risk" of the suicide-ganker is that he gets bloody bored to death because no worthy suicide-gank target comes along. There's your balance. 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.
Terminus adacai Auroran PeaceKeepers Northern Regions Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.27 03:59:00 - [23] This is an age old argument. If you were to remove insurance from the argument, I would agree that some of the ganked deserved it. But consider their risk in moving a lot of isk in minerals or goods. They may not be smart about it, but does that give the green light to toss away alts and trial accounts to gank and profit? They have little to no risk in ganking. You might as well say that the lady wearing a high skirt in a red light district deserved to be raped. Gankers and griefers are nothing less then pond scum. The majority of em use a throw away alt or a free trial account, as to avoid standings drop to their main. This is a game mechanic fault that needs to be addressed. Not everyone playing this game is looking for a fight. Opinions reflected on my posts are just that, my opinions. They do not reflect views held by my corp or alliance.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:00:00 - [24] Originally by: Terminus adacai But consider their risk in moving a lot of isk in minerals or goods. They may not be smart about it, but does that give the green light to toss away alts and trial accounts to gank and profit? They have little to no risk in ganking. The risk is called "permaban". If you even SUSPECT somebody does this, report and have him eliminated from the game. For good. 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.
Terminus adacai Auroran PeaceKeepers Northern Regions Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:03:00 - [25] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: El'Niaga The only problem I have is there is no risk to the kamikaze pilot in current game terms. Why does the GANKER have to have an even "risk vs reward" ratio ? What's wrong if ONLY the victim's risk-vs-rewards ratio is "just right" ? For all you know, the suicide-gankers are merely performing a public service, keeping greedy, careless people in line by spanking them hard. The "risk" of the suicide-ganker is that he gets bloody bored to death because no worthy suicide-gank target comes along. There's your balance. So the ganker that uses a toss away alt or free trial to avoid security hits to their main and attacks and takes someone else's earnings are not greedy? Public service my ass..... Opinions reflected on my posts are just that, my opinions. They do not reflect views held by my corp or alliance.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:04:00 - [26] Originally by: Terminus adacai So the ganker that uses a toss away alt or free trial to avoid security hits to their main Rubbish. 1\|2\|3\|4\|5.
Aindrias Labteck Corporation LTD. Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:04:00 - [27] I love the "She dressed hot, she deserved it..." mentality, whoa guys, stop being psychotic ;-) it's just ISK ;-) Suiciding should be doable, just don't get rewarded for it ;-).
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:05:00 - [28] I regularly carry anywhere from about 40 to a max of 350M of loot from low-sec to high-sec in a T1 frigate on a 800K SP alt. Just not AFK... WTZ, jump, WTZ, jump. And not to Jita. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
El'Niaga Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:08:00 - [29] Originally by: Terminus adacai So the ganker that uses a toss away alt or free trial to avoid security hits to their main and attacks and takes someone else's earnings are not greedy? Public service my ass..... Of course they are being greedy. Alts is a major problem with eve, but you probably could not fix it without losing a good number of subscriptions at this point. I think the simplest and best solution is removal of insurance while criminally flagged. Then also a change in how Concord responds to ensure the concord baiting doesn't work to save the criminals and all is good.
Roid Hunter Perkone	Posted - 2008.03.27 04:11:00 - [30] Originally by: El'Niaga Originally by: Terminus adacai So the ganker that uses a toss away alt or free trial to avoid security hits to their main and attacks and takes someone else's earnings are not greedy? Public service my ass..... Of course they are being greedy. Alts is a major problem with eve, but you probably could not fix it without losing a good number of subscriptions at this point. I think the simplest and best solution is removal of insurance while criminally flagged. Then also a change in how Concord responds to ensure the concord baiting doesn't work to save the criminals and all is good. Amen!!! What a simple fix! If we ***** as much as the Amar pilots do, maybe we'll see a fix... ;p



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: 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.