|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11955
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 19:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
Noragli wrote:Carmen Electra wrote:Noragli wrote:for the past year or two ganking has spiralled out of control You must be new here. You missed the golden age of ganking by a couple of years. Ganking used to be just mostly about ganking miners in the belts. Now they just target anyone and everyone for the killmails and for lols. In the last 1-2 years freighters became a hot ganker target, they target everyone now.
Ganking is at an all time low. I am old enough to remember what pirates used to get up to in high sec and today is nothing like the slaughter back then. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11956
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 20:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Winter Archipelago wrote:Auron Black wrote: Just because ccp has yet to address an issue doesn't mean they wont. I would be shocked if this loop hole isn't closed, as it is clearly unintended, if you look at it from an unbiased opinion.
EvE has existed since 2003. Suicide ganking has been occurring since 2003. It isn't a loophole, it's working exactly as intended. If you feel it's a problem, create a support ticket in-game asking it to be looked into. Once again, you have all of the tools available to you already, you just aren't using them. People like you come to the forums to whine and cry about how this or that should be nerfed, claiming it's an exploit or similar, but you never create support tickets to have it looked at. You have the tools you need. If you feel it's an exploit, create a support ticket in-game. First somebody needs to explain him how the game actually works and what concepts it's built upon.
The best part is that the vast bulk of pilots this would hurt are lowsec players, FW players and anyone from highsec that partakes in pvp in lowsec on the weekend.
Gankers can operate without docking in highsec. So, gankers would adapt while a huge number of people not linked with ganking in any way are nerfed to the point not being able to play. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11959
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 20:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Christina Project wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Solecist Project wrote:In my head everything's easy! I even bought a couple hundred thrashers! Good for you! I look forward to you getting a bunch of guys together and killing a few hundred billion ISK of freighters. So you not even not adress my post, you try to ridicule me in a way that works with only the stupidest of people. What does "gathering people to shoot things" have to do with "finding industrials willing to do what they love" ? Nothing. So, do you have any actual experience in suicide ganking solo or in a fleet? No answer?? Thought so.
Given that he thinks ganking freighters with thrashers is a good idea I would say no. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11962
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 05:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote: Ganking is at an all time low. I am old enough to remember what pirates used to get up to in high sec and today is nothing like the slaughter back then.
I disagree with that. Suicide ganking is running rampant in high security. It's definitely a lot more prevalent now than it was back when I started playing in 2008. DMC
Back in 2008 we were using fully insureable gank battleships and concord response times were much slower.
My memory goes back to the days of M0o. Back then you could tank concord and shut down a system. They killed thousands of ships in just one day and their blocade was only broken when CCP stepped in and moved the camps pilots to the far cor ers of EVE. Nothing that happens today comes close to back then, you have no idea just how good you have it. Ganking today is a very rare event. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11962
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 07:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
Azure Rayl wrote:The problem isn't ganking per se, it's the lack of mechanics to combat ganking. Most gankers buy tags to keep there sec status high enough to not be targeted by concord (a very poor mechanic, sec status loss means nothing to them). We know who the gankers are, we know when they are scanning for a target yet we cant touch them until the crime is dealt and done (unless you want to activate that 1 billion isk killright or gank and lose you ship in the process) i mean the lack of tools to combat them is crazy, it's no wonder why they do it :(
The are a lot of tools you can use to defend yourself. People are simply chosing to not use them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11962
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 07:44:00 -
[6] - Quote
Azure Rayl wrote:baltec1 wrote:Azure Rayl wrote:The problem isn't ganking per se, it's the lack of mechanics to combat ganking. Most gankers buy tags to keep there sec status high enough to not be targeted by concord (a very poor mechanic, sec status loss means nothing to them). We know who the gankers are, we know when they are scanning for a target yet we cant touch them until the crime is dealt and done (unless you want to activate that 1 billion isk killright or gank and lose you ship in the process) i mean the lack of tools to combat them is crazy, it's no wonder why they do it :( The are a lot of tools you can use to defend yourself. People are simply chosing to not use them. To clarify im not talking about defending against gankers (that is pretty easy) :P im talking about viable ways to offend known gankers before they actually gank :D
You do know that you can gank gankers and make a profit right? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11962
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 07:53:00 -
[7] - Quote
Azure Rayl wrote:
Because ganking an economically fit thrasher/tornado is profitable right :P
Yes it is. We figured out how to turn a profit ganking t2 cats and their scanning frigates. A t2 fitted nado or talos are very easy to gank and always turn a profit. Gank boats are all gank and no tank. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11963
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 10:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
Butzewutze wrote:Azure Rayl wrote:The problem isn't ganking per se, it's the lack of mechanics to combat ganking. Most gankers buy tags to keep there sec status high enough to not be targeted by concord (a very poor mechanic, sec status loss means nothing to them). We know who the gankers are, we know when they are scanning for a target yet we cant touch them until the crime is dealt and done (unless you want to activate that 1 billion isk killright or gank and lose you ship in the process) i mean the lack of tools to combat them is crazy, it's no wonder why they do it :(
edit: To clarify im not talking about defending against gankers (that is pretty easy) :P im talking about viable ways to offend known gankers before they actually gank :D So you say sec status loss means nothing for gankers but you dont engage them anyway. You know they fix their sec status with tags. Ever tried to do something about that? Buying the tags of the market to make it unprofitable or maybe farm the tags yourself to get actually profit out of the "gankers that get out of control"? You dont fit your ships properly and demand ccp to take action because of your own imcompetence? Welcome to eve. Players like you will be sorted out.
We dont bother with sec tags. Even when open to pvp from everyone people wont attack us. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11963
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 11:42:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:baltec1 wrote:
We dont bother with sec tags. Even when open to pvp from everyone people wont attack us.
What about when the faction cops take an interest? Do you just rat for sec the old fashioned way?
More or less. We own the testigram so ratting staus back up isnt too much of a drama but we only bother doi g that if we a running some kind of operation for the CFC. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11963
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 11:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Solecist Project wrote: How? They hide in station all the time, until they strike. When they strike, it's too late.
There's nothing one can do against these lesser people, as long as they can hide from everybody.
So how do they get from where they're hiding, passed you, to where they strike, if you're such a superior person? What kind of comment is that? Instaundock. Warp to target. Strike. Dock. If you don't quite get it, try to visualize it and tell me how it's possible to know where they go, and how it's possible to be there before them. Even if that was doable, it'd still not help at all. Any scenario people have come up with so far are completely disconnected from ingame reality. Can you do better?
We are going to a gate, there are two to pick from, our target freighter can be identified as the one being bumped by nano battleships. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11964
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 13:14:00 -
[11] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:baltec1 wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Solecist Project wrote: How? They hide in station all the time, until they strike. When they strike, it's too late.
There's nothing one can do against these lesser people, as long as they can hide from everybody.
So how do they get from where they're hiding, passed you, to where they strike, if you're such a superior person? What kind of comment is that? Instaundock. Warp to target. Strike. Dock. If you don't quite get it, try to visualize it and tell me how it's possible to know where they go, and how it's possible to be there before them. Even if that was doable, it'd still not help at all. Any scenario people have come up with so far are completely disconnected from ingame reality. Can you do better? We are going to a gate, there are two to pick from, our target freighter can be identified as the one being bumped by nano battleships. So? And what's your idea of countering you?
ECM, logi, counter gank, fast locking high dps cruisers, command ships. The list goes on, not only is it easy to work out where the strike will happen but its also easy to counter it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11967
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 13:53:00 -
[12] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:The best solution : - All offensive modules against other players disabled in 1.0-0.9 - Instant concord in 0.8-0.7 - No concord ( only NPC milita ships) in 0.6-0.5
Issue solved. 1.Every one is safe in 1.0-0.9 2.Instant death from concord for those who try something bad in 0.8-0.7 3.More fun in 0.6-0.5
This is the most anti EVE idea possible. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11979
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 14:23:00 -
[13] - Quote
Auron Black wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Auron Black wrote:If you want players to counter gank and set traps then give us something worth ganking. We aren't going to set up traps or spend hours sitting on a gate in hopes of catching a couple 10m destroyers. Go after their logistics chain either with guns or via the market. Their ships and guns don't appear from nowhere, they have to be shipped in or purchased. Quote:Sure you "can" attack a suicide ganker but the question becomes why bother? It's boring, unprofitable, and wont ever accomplish anything. In other words it's too much effort to do it yourself, you want others to do it for you ....lol ok so that's balanced? To gank you invest 10m isk and a weeks worth of sp. To defend against a gank you have to crash the entire eve market permanently. Why on earth did i even reply to this nonsense
Yes its balanced. We spend as much as we need to, if people dont defend themselves then we can hardly be blamed for it being rather easy to kill them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11983
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 15:54:00 -
[14] - Quote
Noragli wrote: It's a fact that their type of behaviour will make players quit the game. EVE subs are dropping. I'm not wrong.
Last data we got showed subs rising.
Also there was a very big blip in new players after the battles of 6vdt and the slaughter of titans. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11995
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 04:00:00 -
[15] - Quote
Xaldafax Caerleon wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Xaldafax Caerleon wrote: but I believe we can find a middle ground by applying models and themes and other references than just simple binary either/or type solutions. No, we can't. Regardless of whatever model you might want to use, it seems very clear to me that you want less player freedom. That is flatly unacceptable to me. Wow I guess you really have a complete misunderstanding of my message from the start. I want MORE player freedom... both on the GANKER and NON-GANKER sides. What part of my "cause and effect" comment was not understood? Hence, why I also followed it up with the comment about applying models, themes, and other references instead of just a yes/no solution. Freedom needs to be on both sides right now. Actually if we would increase the abilities of those in high-sec to take action toward a ganker PRIOR to his gank, then I think we might have a way to solve the problem. The bounty system needs rework, etc. But there is no reason to get into any of that because if people aren't even able to get my simple message of "cause and effect" and "applying a different model to the problem" then it isn't worth the time to try to explain.
Haulers do not need any more abilities increased. They have a huge amount of tools and tactics to combat gankers and many of them are very very easy to do. Ganking should not be nerfed even more to protect people from their own greed, lazyness and stupidity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11995
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 04:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Bohneik Itohn wrote:So there are 16 pages to this thread... I'm not reading all of that crap...
Has anyone... Just possibly... Mentioned that it may be safer to go a few jumps through a quiet stretch of low sec than it would be to keep trying to fly freighters through systems like Aufray and Niarja?
How about dem high sec to high sec WH's that can carry freighters? I've scanned a few of those down without even looking for them, they shouldn't be hard to find with a covops frigate and a few minutes. You get to skip the scary bits of space AND cut an hour off of your travel time if you're lucky. It's all win.
I also don't understand the logic behind using a freighter over a transport or blockade runner. It make take several more trips to haul the same volume but you can make those several trips in the same amount of time with a significantly lower chance of losing your ship overall, and you lose significantly less if you do get ganked.... If you're gonna carebear, get it right and minimize the risk as much as possible. If you're going to take risks and fly a giant space whale that attracts everyone's attention, man up and don't cry on the forums when your bluff gets called.
It kind of makes me wish I was the kind of person who could find transporting in Eve entertaining, because I have a feeling I could get filthy rich doing it.... 10,000 M3 in a DST versus 900,000 M3 in a freighter. "several more trips to haul the same volume " ???????
So why are you not using its fleet bay? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11996
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 06:29:00 -
[17] - Quote
Xaldafax Caerleon wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Haulers do not need any more abilities increased. They have a huge amount of tools and tactics to combat gankers and many of them are very very easy to do. Ganking should not be nerfed even more to protect people from their own greed, lazyness and stupidity.
You segmented my comment specifically to the haulers group which is not what I am talking about. Haulers have many abilities and so do the gankers. So that is not the problem here that I was talking about. If you look in the thread of my specific comments I am not asking for any nerfs. I am saying that people should have more abilities around the cause and effects of your decisions. People that do criminal actions regularly should be see as that no matter where they are... not have the ability to see in safety until they decide to blow themselves up. Just like people that decide to fly billions around without protection shouldn't get home safe. The problem is that the mechanics around hostile actions need to be revamped more. Like I said a person we all knew was a FBI most wanted would never survive sitting in a star bucks. He would be taken out long before he could kill someone. He already decided how he wanted to act in society and that decision has a price. In comparison... Just like the rich person that pulls a million dollars out of the bank and has it sitting in a bag open for the world to see in a convertible goes into star bucks to get a latte. He comes back and his bag and the million is gone. Cause and effect. We need to adjust the model more than the specifics...
In real life we would be pirates and the FBI would have nothing to do with us, we would have the Royal Navy hunting us down. You have all the tools you need to combat gankers, use them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11996
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 06:54:00 -
[18] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Tauranon wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Commandante Caldari wrote:
If your flying solo its possible that they may be bumping you towards a warpable object, In that case just warp to it and your free. Fit a DCU and 2 bulkheads, it gives you somewhere in the range of 600k ehp on a freighter.
Fist off I can tell you have never been bumped in a freighter or even own a freighter. Trust me once you start being bumped your chances of being able to warp off are virtually zero. The guys doing the bumping know what they are doing. If you have 2 escorts and they have 2 bumpers, you can warp, unless your escorts are useless. This whole line of debate is just another variation of "I deserve to win 1v12 whilst afk". At what point have I even mentioned being afk? You can easily bump a freighter who is not afk. What you are saying is that every trip you make in your freighter you have to have a couple of guys with you all the way using a legal loophole.
Why do you think you should be able to beat 20-30 pilots when solo. Is it really to much to ask for you to have 2 guys escorting you? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11998
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 10:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
Noragli wrote:The pen empty freighters are targetted in hi-sec space. Some were even tanked with 3 bulkheads, and empty, still ganked.
Nobody is asking for ganking to be removed, but the mechanics could use a change. Nobody should be able to stay at -10 in hi-sec and continue to gank people. Ship use should be restricted if you are an outlaw trying to use a system that is above your level of security status. You can still travel anywhere in a pod, and possible a shuttle if they allow that.
If you want to keep ganking in hi-sec , you can, but first you need to fix your sec status. I know right now that it's quite cheap using the new pirate drop, but if this change is made, more people will buy it, and the price will go up.
They are not cheap, hence why most dont bother with them. You have just nerfed everyone that pvps in lowsec and greatly damaged EVE in the long run.
Ganking has been nerfed to the point now where any more nerfs to it will effectivly remove it as a viable profession. You have the tools and tactics you need, it is entirely your own fault if you get ganked now. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12008
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 12:32:00 -
[20] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:baltec1 wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:Regrading the balance part and MWD comparison: There we go again... subjective approach and playing with semantics Regarding the possibility of activity expansions and costs: According to Halaima MinerBumping IPO - Over THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-FOUR BILLION sold there's enough interest by investors to see this happen and there are certainly enough funds already to make a good start. Besides, suicide ganking is a self-sustainable activity that can pay for itself even without massive outside funding as we already have in place now. Recruiting more is not an issue since it can be a side activity anyway and anyone can participate and contribute to in it at their own pace with an alt. Existence of hard-core dedicated gankers is encouraged, but the real effect would come even if more casual numbers are involved. It would not be sustainable and no powerblock could fund it. With data about costs/profit from an event like that, this would sound like a fact. Without data about costs/profit it sounds more like a challenge So, I'll ask: are detailed statistics of ISK spent/ISK earned from Burn Jita event available somewhere? All I can see from metrics on the official site is about ISK destroyed, which is not very usefull.
We are the corp that runs these kinds of things, what you ask for would cost tens of trillions to do. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12009
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 13:15:00 -
[21] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Fair enough, but did this event not show that whether you were at the keyboard, carrying no or low value, fully fitted with every possible module pilots still got killed? 1) you are never ever 100% safe - this is good for the game, it keeps things interesting and exciting 2) in this specific 'event', a simple scout would have saved you with 99% certainty
Or just looking at the map and avoiding the system entirely. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12011
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 13:40:00 -
[22] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote: This event actually was ganking at keyboard characters with empty freighters .... theres the problem......
What problem?
They flew their anti tanked ship into a well known roadblock with no escort or scout. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12012
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:41:00 -
[23] - Quote
Xaldafax Caerleon wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote: So, the only thing stopping you from shooting a non-outlaw ganker is the sec status hit? Honestly, it really isn't that big a deal. See above, I took my +5 alt out, blew up a random miner, and went to 4.8. Nowhere near the -5.0 "criminal" status. As long as you don't pop pods, you can blow up lots and lots of non-outlaw gankers before you even hit -2.0.
Think of it like vigilante justice if that helps. Sure, according to the law, Batman is a Bad Guy, and should go to prison....
And yeah, if they're already blinky, blast away. Free target.
The issue is more than the security status hit. Not all of us have +5 sec status. This is an issue of the design and context of the problem. Not a black and white answer. Give people more tools in HS to take on people that act like criminals BEFORE they gank. Stop waiting for them start the action and stop them in the 3 seconds before its done and the pop their victim. Allow people more ways to get them earlier. This is why I use the analogy of the FBI and most wanted list in a normal public place with police around...
You have the tools, you just refuse the use them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12014
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
Xaldafax Caerleon wrote:Kalon Horan wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:
For what purpose, by the time they warp in the target is already history? And concord are already destroying the gankers One cannot target the scouts haulers etc etc that make it possible as a mechanic.
So how does that inconvinience the gankers in any way?
As stated before... little me alone prevented quite a few suicide kills yesterday by shooting the gankers b4 they can blow up their target. What stops other people to do the same? I can tell you what stops them... they can not fatten their wallet by doing it. Did you take a security hit for shooting the ganker before they attacked the victim?
Given that most are -10 I would say unlikely.
However, nothing is stopping you from ganking a ganker. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12014
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 15:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:How about the dev's fly freighters for a month. Then we will see if they actually understand.
Given that out of millions of trips made by freighters every month only a few dosen die I would say they will have a rather univentful time. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12016
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 16:30:00 -
[26] - Quote
Evei Shard wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:They can get round it using alts but they shouldn't have to unless they want to. ..but freighter pilots should be required to have alts.
Not alts, friends. 20-30 ships are involved when attacking it, stands to reason the it should have some friends. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12016
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 16:33:00 -
[27] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote: Yea I am sure getting banned on a free disposable account really stops them from from biomassing.
The price needs to be in line with the target and its not. Some one flying a multi billion isk freighter that took several months to train should not be able to get ganked by toons that get bio massed and made over and over in high dps low cost ships.
There is no price.
If tank was based upon isk value then the federate issue megathron would have more tank than 80 titans, 100 supers, 4 fleets of dreadnoughts, two fleets of carriers and 5 fleets of battleships. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12021
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 17:02:00 -
[28] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:
Not sure which posting you are reading but sure ins't mine.
The only issue I currently have (once again) is bumping and the fact that 1 pilot can infinitely bump a freighter until the gank squad arrives and it is completely out of the freighter pilots hands.
This is why the tactic is used so often. As the guy bumping you know that the only way the freighter pilot can escape is if you screw up, there is nothing he can do to effect the outcome.
The only tactic to avoid being bumped is to use a legal loophole. You can talk as much as you like about what ever the hell you talking about but it still does not negate the fact that the only counter to bumping when you are a freighter pilot is by using a legal loophole.
Again I have no issues with ganking and I also do not want bumping to be banned, however it is worth a discussion to see if the mechanics can be changed in some way.
Also just in case you missed it, this has nothing to do with being afk. Without having people webbing you the quickest you could go to warp is about 25 secs with a seriously gimped fit and implants, still more then enough time to be bumped.
Its not a legal loophole. Just get someone to web you or have them bump the bumper. It is very easy to stop someone bumping you. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12022
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 17:08:00 -
[29] - Quote
Auron Black wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote: His idea is pretty much a big FU to anybody who does faction warfare or lowsec PvP. It locks them out the market hubs and highsec in general. They can get round it using alts but they shouldn't have to unless they want to.
It's 100% intended in his suggestion, by the way. That's the end goal of all carebears. To lock out other people's gameplay, turn the game into Trammel. I love the absolute nonsense you spout in your posts, it is actually quite funny. Carebears couldn't care less about low sec pvp, fw or other. It is the end goal of "all" gankers to lock out other people's gameplay, turn the game into trammel. Remember you force your game play on us, not the other way around, there is plenty of space for you to play in where you don't need to worry about facpo or concord or sec standing.
We don't force anything on you. You agree to being open to pvp at any time when playing EVE. If you don't like this then best find a game that isn't EVE. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12026
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 17:22:00 -
[30] - Quote
Carmen Electra wrote:baltec1 wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote: Yea I am sure getting banned on a free disposable account really stops them from from biomassing.
The price needs to be in line with the target and its not. Some one flying a multi billion isk freighter that took several months to train should not be able to get ganked by toons that get bio massed and made over and over in high dps low cost ships.
There is no price.
If tank was based upon isk value then the federate issue megathron would have more tank than 80 titans, 100 supers, 4 fleets of dreadnoughts, two fleets of carriers and 5 fleets of battleships. Do you have a federate issue megathron? I can haz?
No, there is only one and I am quite happy with who has it as they will keep it safe. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12040
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 03:53:00 -
[31] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:or you can use dscan and 0 skill noobs to shoot the target and call in CONCORD just a bit early.
Surprise!
Spawning concord to protect you is actually a bannable offence. We got a large number of miners banned for doing this in the ice interdictions. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12040
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 05:17:00 -
[32] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:or you can use dscan and 0 skill noobs to shoot the target and call in CONCORD just a bit early.
Surprise! Spawning concord to protect you is actually a bannable offence. We got a large number of miners banned for doing this in the ice interdictions. Just a wild guess here but only like 1 out of 100,000 people know this. Then you need to prove I'm not just a fail ganker tying to get in on the kill. Also its interresting that you can move concord away, the reverse of what I brought up, for more gank time and not get banned.
Moving concord around isn't bannable as we dont avoid our punishment.
Using concord as protection however is viewed as an exploit as it is players who should be doing the protecting, not an invincible, unstoppable NPC fleet. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12040
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 05:32:00 -
[33] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:baltec1 wrote: Moving concord around isn't bannable as we dont avoid our punishment.
Using concord as protection however is viewed as an exploit as it is players who should be doing the protecting, not an invincible, unstoppable NPC fleet.
I may be wrong, but IIRC, a chunk of those bans came about because miners were doing that thing they accuse us gankers of doing all the time....rolling an alt, using a newbie ship to summon concord, then biomassing the alt once it hit outlaw status.
Some were yes but many were caught before they got to the point of recycling the alt. In the second interdiction we kept track of the people we reported and a good number ended up getting a week long vacation before they got biomassed Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12040
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 06:19:00 -
[34] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Some were yes but many were caught before they got to the point of recycling the alt. In the second interdiction we kept track of the people we reported and a good number ended up getting a week long vacation before they got biomassed
Interesting! You wouldn't happen to have "official" word from CCP saying as much, would you? Not that I disagree with you, I'd just like a little ammo to toss at the kiddos who suggest this as a "tactic" every other day.
No quotes that I can recall. All we have are the actions of CCP when we ran the interdictions. Its much like boomerang, very very few knew it was a thing for 8 years untill someone went and filmed his abuse of it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12041
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 09:32:00 -
[35] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Don't remember Concord Summoning being declared an exploit by CCP. Anyone have the link to it being announced?
Pics or it didn't happen seems to apply here.
The fact that a good many were banned for doing it tells us its true.
Anyone with half a brain can see how spawning an invincible npc fleet that will lock down and wipe out anything isn't an intended mechanic. Protection is provided by players, not npc fleets. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12041
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 11:31:00 -
[36] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:baltec1 wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Don't remember Concord Summoning being declared an exploit by CCP. Anyone have the link to it being announced?
Pics or it didn't happen seems to apply here. The fact that a good many were banned for doing it tells us its true. If they didn't biomass the char which was used to summon CONCORD, they should have petitioned the ban because it was unjustified. Summoning CONCORD in itself is perfectly legal, no matter if the ganker does it or the miner. The only thing that is not allowed is biomassing the char with a negative security status to avoid the consequences. Here is the official position of CCP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4572979#post4572979I'd welcome if CCP would put this in a more visible place, as gankers love to spread the misinformation that it isn't allowed.
At no point do either CCP or GMs say that summoning concord for protection is legal. Bot are simply stating that recycling alts to avoid sec loss is bannable.
summoning concord to protect you is abusing the game mechanics, if you want a fleet to protect you then you must get the players to do it, not an invincible npc fleet. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12041
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 11:42:00 -
[37] - Quote
Morihei Akachi wrote:baltec1 wrote: summoning concord to protect you is abusing the game mechanics, if you want a fleet to protect you then you must get the players to do it, not an invincible npc fleet.
This makes no sense to me. The cost of summoning Concord is the same as the cost of ganking the freighter to begin with: a ship and some security status. How is the one an exploit and the other not?
You can summon concord with an ibis, the ship is free so no, it is not the same cost.
The reason why it is an exploit is because concord make it impossible to kill the target when they are on grid and there is no way of getting rid of them. Concord is there to punish, not protect. Protection is the job of players, not god mode NPCs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12042
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 12:04:00 -
[38] - Quote
Spectral Tiger wrote:DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Yeah, people do "have to put up with such behavior" when they play EVE. Ganking, piracy, all of this is nothing new, and has been around since launch. Corporations and alliances that center around these activities are also nothing new, and have been with us for many, many years.
The "difference" you are probably noticing is that we at the New Order have a great PR department, a lot of fun, and have frankly taken the art of the high-sec suicide gank and totally perfected it.
What I've noticed is an increase in those activities although extortion I've only noticed in the last few years. There was piracy extortion before in low sec, but not for high sec activities that I was ever aware of except in the last few years (what you call permits).
Extortion in high sec is as old as the game. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12043
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 12:20:00 -
[39] - Quote
Quote:
It doesn't get much clearer than that.
Yet players were banned for doing it and we were told via GMs that spawning concord to protect yourself is not an intended use of concord. Concord is a punishment, not a merc group you call on to protect yourself from other players. Godmode npcs are not there to do the job of players. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12054
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 17:32:00 -
[40] - Quote
malcovas Henderson wrote:baltec1 wrote:Morihei Akachi wrote:baltec1 wrote: summoning concord to protect you is abusing the game mechanics, if you want a fleet to protect you then you must get the players to do it, not an invincible npc fleet.
This makes no sense to me. The cost of summoning Concord is the same as the cost of ganking the freighter to begin with: a ship and some security status. How is the one an exploit and the other not? You can summon concord with an ibis, the ship is free so no, it is not the same cost. The reason why it is an exploit is because concord make it impossible to kill the target when they are on grid and there is no way of getting rid of them. Concord is there to punish, not protect. Protection is the job of players, not god mode NPCs. I beg to differ. If I summon Concord in an Ibis, by shooting the freighter I am protecting. Concord is actually coming to punish me. It's a jolly good bonus the freighter gains in protection though.
People used the same kind of argument to try and keep boomerang, it didn't wash. You are using concord as invincible mercs to protect your assets. That's the job of players, not invincible NPCs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12055
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 18:12:00 -
[41] - Quote
malcovas Henderson wrote:baltec1 wrote:malcovas Henderson wrote: Ok. So I see your scout on grid, I decide to pre-emptive strike him by "Ganking" him. Concord appear. So what's the difference? Concord still arrive to punish me, AND I get a massive protection boost. Or is what you are saying, only gankers are allowed to gank?
No, you shot at a target to kill it. Shooting your own freighter with an ibis only has the goal of spawning concord for protection. Thats the difference. That's the point. I can shoot any target on grid. Concord would still arrive, to punish ME. Not to protect the freighter as you seem to think. The protection is a bonus to my actions. Look at it another way. A random Freighter jumps into system, Dominixes start to bump him. I decide to engage the Dominix. Now are Concord coming to protect the Freighter? or are they coming to protect the Dominix?
It doesnt matter how you try to word this. You are spawning concord with the intent to protect your assets with an invincible NPC fleet. The job of protecting your assets is yours and the players in your fleet, not concord. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12055
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 21:14:00 -
[42] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:At least you got one thing right: I never posted private GM communication. All DEV/GM quotes were taken from this thread on the official forums: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=818978I suggest you read it to its full extend in order to also get the context of each CCP response. Until you can come up with something substantial (e.g. public and verifiable quotes from official CCP people) that overrule CCP's responses in the above thread, I don't see any ground for further discussion with you about this topic.
Getting a GM answer on this is damn near impossible it seems. They just keep on giving the answer that concord blowing up ships is working as intended.
So in true goon fashion I would say abuse this questionable tactic until they come out with a solid answer. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12059
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 10:54:00 -
[43] - Quote
There is nothing as vile as carebear hatred. They make us look like angels when they open their mouths and they have a bad habit of taking in game actions out of game and harassing people. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12063
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 16:37:00 -
[44] - Quote
malcovas Henderson wrote:I do agree that Carebears are a scourge to any game. At the same time they are in a no win situation. they are being forced by gankers into 0.7 - 1.0. to mine their ****.
Now do not get me wrong here. I respect a well organised gank, and believe me I have seen some impressive ganks. I think though that the greed over tank situation needs to be fixed. Greed should see a ibis blowing up a hulk, where as tank should offer some form of protection. off the top of my head, Warp scram immunity for no mining upgrades modules.
ATM there is no reason to tank anything because the Gank packs have grown larger. You get blown up reguardless. Especially in a 0.5 - 0.6 system
Get a skiff. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12063
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 16:52:00 -
[45] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote: Personally I can't see any philosophical difference between a player that sits and watches red dots get blown up by a white dot and someone that sits on a gate scanning an endless stream of ship waiting to turn it into a red dot for them to blow up. Both are mind numbing exercises in an attempt to get more ISK to play more EVE, to get more ISK to pay more EVE, to get more ISK to play more EVE...
Yeah one is without a doubt the superior species of player, just can't tell from my Ivory tower, eyesight has gone to pot from shooting to many red dots.
See, people often mistake carebears as a term for all miners/indi ect players.
A carebear is infact, simply someone who is adverce to anything bad that happens to them. They are a minority who hate pvp in all forms or any mechanic that negetivly inpacts them and anychallange they face is something they think should be removed from the game. They refuce to adapt, they hate the idea of risk and any setback is gamebreaking to them.
These are the people we hate. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12063
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 16:54:00 -
[46] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:lol I can't believe you people are falling for her. xD
Alas, we have learned that even troll posts must be countered. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12069
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 17:48:00 -
[47] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Your definition is excellent... but are you sure they are a "minority"? Because AFAIK they are like fat on the buttocks. Everyone hate it, most have a fair amount of it.
Yes I am.
They are the westbro baptist church of EVE, very few but very loud.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12069
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 19:46:00 -
[48] - Quote
ISD Ezwal's lock always misfires. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12078
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 15:46:00 -
[49] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Getting rid of FacPo would contribute nothing to player-to-player interaction. The "auto-yellow" will cause players to dock up anyway.
If you want auto-yellow at existing sec status thresholds like -4.5 (or -2 in 1.0) then it might seem like less of an attempt to create ganker easy mode.
But that still doesn't demonstrate how it would change anything at all in player-to-player interaction.
It would change a great deal.
For example, -10s could fly bigger, slower ships. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12078
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 15:50:00 -
[50] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:baltec1 wrote:It would change a great deal.
For example, -10s could fly bigger, slower ships. Because other players would be worse than FacPo at shooting down BSs? How do you figure?
They cant even shoot down gankboats with the tank of a wet paper bag.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12078
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 16:01:00 -
[51] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Hell make auto-yellow on -1. I'd prefer that tbh. As it stands at the minute, sec status loss is meanless anyway in real terms, you just pump it back up again with tags before the FacPo gives a crap
You think removing NPCs doesnt increase the amount of interaction you have to have with players?
How do you figure that, sportsfan? Your FACE is a sportsfan! This is what I think: 1. Eliminating FacPo and making auto-yellow on -10 makes it too easy. No FacPo for -4.5 to -9.9, allowing use of BS. And we gain nothing from this because no one could freely shoot at -4.5 to -9.9. 2. Making auto-yellow on -1 makes it too hard. It would wreck the desire a lot of players have to do bad things because anyone could shoot at them for just about anything. Even the current sec status thresholds are too harsh, in my opinion. It would destroy crime in hisec because currently there *are* ways around FacPo (encourages players who play smarter). I don't like either because they both seem worse than current implementation.
Whats with all of this auto-yellow at -10?
At -10 you are an outlaw and can be shot at already. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12083
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 16:31:00 -
[52] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whats with all of this auto-yellow at -10?
At -10 you are an outlaw and can be shot at already. I think it's paraphrased badly, but the discussion is around: can someone argue that players themselves can serve as FacPo, and would that increase the interaction between players. Players can shoot -5 and below, but FacPo have more "flexibility" since they can shoot "less negative" sec status'd folks in some systems. If we eliminate FacPo, would players get FacPo rights or keep their existing rights? My point is, eliminating FacPo and having players keep existing rights makes it too easy. Eliminating FacPo and giving players the exact same shooting rights as FacPo makes it too hard. Edit: added a verb
Give players the option to take over the job of the facpo and they will. CCP would like for players to be the ones scanning for contraband which this would allow. There are lots of people who enjoy playing the cops so yes, this would provide a good deal of content for a good number of people. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12125
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 11:21:00 -
[53] - Quote
Grobalobobob Bob wrote:It just comes back down to the whole bumping thing. Bumping should be effective ONLY ships of /- a percentage equal or greater size and mass of the ship you're bumping.
It's like a kid on a surfboard bumping an oil tanker.. it's just ridiculous. Really, you should need something the same size as a freighter to bump a freighter, anything smaller should just glance off like it doesn't exist.
We use machs, they are just as big as carriers. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12125
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 20:02:00 -
[54] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote: Is it really PVP when your shooting unarmed, indefensible ships.
Yes it is. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12128
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 20:28:00 -
[55] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Grobalobobob Bob wrote: IT IS BECAUSE A WIZARD DID IT, ergo, it's WoW in space. There's no wizards in WoW Shamans and mages don't count? A shaman is a healer and spiritual advisor, basically a cross between a priest and a doctor. Mages are magicians or learned persons.
"A mage is like a wizard, only not as cool." -Cartman Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12130
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 21:16:00 -
[56] - Quote
So I guess all the ISDs are watching the football while moderating. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12134
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 23:55:00 -
[57] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
Now, give me a manner I can arm my miners and industrials and turn the tables on the immature idiot ambushers who don't want a fight... let's just say I could definately change to a PvPer.
[Skiff, Brick]
Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Caldari Navy EM Ward Field Thermic Dissipation Amplifier II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Modulated Strip Miner II
Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II
Vespa EC-600 x5
117k EHP. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12136
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 00:12:00 -
[58] - Quote
Tippia wrote:baltec1 wrote:[Skiff, Brick]
[GǪ]
117k EHP. To put that into perspectiveGǪ [Charon, Charon fit] Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II Expanded Cargohold II 164k EHP. A ship that, contrary to the core claim of this thread, is very rarely ganked and is only really targeted unless it carries billions worth of cargo (which a mining ship never will) because of the considerable co-ordination and pre-planning required to do so, has just 40% more hitpoints than the brick miner does. Any claim that there are no tools available for the self-imposed victims is nothing but sheer and wilful ignorance, bordering on outright stupidity.
It also has a little over twice as much tank as my Harpy fleet Megathron. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12136
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 00:13:00 -
[59] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
But escorting is not as feasible in EvE and Q-ships are not possible.
Watch and learn Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12137
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 00:17:00 -
[60] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:
Now the topic is about tightening restrictions on freighter ganking, something i personally know nothing about since i don't fly them or gank them. It's honestly a very small portion of the destruction of sand castles and no one (that i've seen) has said remove it, just to make it more cost restrictive to gank empty or unprofitable targets.
Always with the just one more nerf. You literally just got freighters buffed and ganking nerfed and now you want even more?
No, learn to protect yourself. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12137
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 00:19:00 -
[61] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
Where is the weapon to damage the opponent?
The untankable wrath that is concord . All you need to do is tank them until they arrive and that is very easy to do with a skiff. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12137
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 00:24:00 -
[62] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:baltec1 wrote:Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
But escorting is not as feasible in EvE and Q-ships are not possible.
Watch and learn i didn't say it was Unfeasible. I said it wasn't as feasible. the amount of co-ordination and disipline involved doesn't happen near as often in EvE as you imply it does.
You said Q-ship are not possible. That solo iteron V killed a battleship. This was before the buffs to haulers which has made them even better and the revamped deep space transports are downright nasty.
Haulers and mining barges are more than able to defend themselves. Christ, I used to hunt people in an iteron V. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12149
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 11:39:00 -
[63] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Drop the EM ward and go Kinetic. 99% of every gank these days is from a catalyst, and KIN/THERM is king. Omni tank is not even needed.
If you tank for hybrids then you will get 157k EHP. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12157
|
Posted - 2014.06.28 07:14:00 -
[64] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:. dispite gankers and others who think PvP should reign alone in EvE.
We don't think this. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12175
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 21:01:00 -
[65] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:Tippia wrote:Gavin Dax wrote:Re ganking specifically - I checked evekill, saw a number of freighters ganked with full bulkheads in 0.5 and <500 mil in cargo. Only 20 catalysts were used for the ganks. This is a joke. How is it a joke that 20 people can kill 1? I suppose the fact that they needed 20 is a bit of a joke GÇö it doesn't seem entirely reasonable that they have to be that numerous. The cost is out of balance Tippia. You can't ignore cost and only look at pilot numbers. It should not be possible to gank a +1 billion ISK hull, especially one supposedly design for transport, so cheaply. Unless you want to cater to one group in EVE that is. It's pretty obvious that this is imbalanced. There is literally no situation where the pilot being ganked has the last laugh. Even if the gank fails the gankers' loss is negligible. This just makes for a bad game (unless, as I said you're part of the "watch the world burn" demographic) and doesn't make much sense.
Balancing tank on isk cost is the single worst thing you could possibly do. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12175
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 21:27:00 -
[66] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:What? Cost shouldn't matter? What's the reason for that exactly? lol
Think armored car in RL transporting money. It only has 2 guys in it. Surely, 20 guys should be able to take that NP right? Should be easy...
My Favourite Megathron is worth a minimum of 1-2 trillion isk.
Why in gods name should I have something with more tank than entire supercapital fleets and the firepower of 1000-2000 titans?? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12177
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 22:27:00 -
[67] - Quote
ergherhdfgh wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Flying along a trade route without backup is always a risk. Had my heart pumping when I flew my alt through Aufay with 750mil in the hold. Good thing the tank of the new DSTs isn't easily estimated, makes a gank attempt riskier, thus less likely. Back Up? Maybe I'm just inexperienced at this but I don't understand what kind of back up you can have in high sec. Low and Null different story but high sec? What am I missing here?
Logi, ECM, blap boats. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12177
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 23:25:00 -
[68] - Quote
ergherhdfgh wrote:Tippia wrote:ergherhdfgh wrote:Back Up? Maybe I'm just inexperienced at this but I don't understand what kind of back up you can have in high sec. Low and Null different story but high sec? What am I missing here? You can have the same in high as everywhere else: scouts, logis, links, ewar, and GÇö quite simply GÇö a whole bunch of firepower. Links I can see being helpful. The rest of this I just don't see. Gankers are counting on loosing their ships to concord and you can't shoot them until they shoot you first because of that: -a logi pilot will only get a couple of cycles off so I don't see that being all that helpful -scouts are useless you already know what the gank systems are and the gates there are perma camped by known gankers. I'm not sure what useful intel you think a scout will give you -Ewar and firepower both of those again you need to wait for the gankers to shoot first so while they can be helpful in reducing the incoming dps by a small margin I doubt enough to make it worth using. -The web trick does not work as well as it used to and I doubt well enough to get you warped out before a freighter blows up. I think the thing you are also neglecting to acknowledge here is that if you brought a logi and an ewar and some dps that's nothing that couldn't be overcome by adding one or two more gank ships which is not a huge expense. On the other side having to pay 3 people to follow you everywhere all the time just incase you have a gank attempt is an extreme cost increase. In null sec you can send friends ahead to clear non-blues off of gates or see if a system is clear. Those options don't exist in high sec. I've escorted freighters through null before to move upgrade mods that wouldn't fit in a JF. I know how that works. None of the things I did to help my freighter pilot in null can I do in high sec.
A gank will be stopped be removing just a few of their ships, they all operate on a fine line.
So yes, ECM, logi and blap boats all work.
Scouts will tell you exactly where the gank is going to take place so you can simply avoid it by going via a different route.
Just tanking your stuff and using the right ships for the job is enough to beat most gank attempts. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12177
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 23:44:00 -
[69] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Oooh! Comedy option: Scimitar or even Basilisk with all those mids filled with ECM, and the lows with SDAs. Or, hell, anything with midslots will do, soGǪ Badger II ECM Tayra GÇö nothing like spanking gankers in an indy.
Locking time on a hauler
However, an arc will get what? 800k EHP before a fleet booster? Good luck blapping that before logi can lock you. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12177
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 23:45:00 -
[70] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote: I don't think HS should be "safe", but right now the issue is that it's simply too safe for pirates - specifically, it's just not risky enough to gank.
Please list all of the risks and punishments for ganking. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12177
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 00:13:00 -
[71] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Gavin Dax wrote: I don't think HS should be "safe", but right now the issue is that it's simply too safe for pirates - specifically, it's just not risky enough to gank.
If ganking was as truly riskless as people claim then a lot more people would be doing it. Despite their best efforts gankers only make a small dent in freighter traffic, for every one they gank, many more complete their journeys. If the odds of getting ganked are worse than 1 in 20 in the pipes and 1 in 10 in the chokes I'd be surprised.
Given the millions of trips made every month and the few dosen that are killed I would say It exceedingly rare.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12178
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 00:20:00 -
[72] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:baltec1 wrote:Gavin Dax wrote: I don't think HS should be "safe", but right now the issue is that it's simply too safe for pirates - specifically, it's just not risky enough to gank.
Please list all of the risks and punishments for ganking. While your at it, please tell me why you feel my gameplay that has been in game from day one should be wiped out because you don't want to put in any effort to protect yourself. Ok. Punishments for ganking: 1. You get a kill right on you. So what? It's not like you gank with your incursion running character. 2. You lose sec status. So what? What you lose is a minor deterrent right now at best 3. You lose your ship. So what? Your ship was cheap as &*@! Rewards for ganking: 1. Tears from someone who lost way more than you did (guaranteed, no way for them to meaningfully fight you back, even in HS) 2. Possible shiny things I never said your gameplay should be wiped out. If you want your gameplay in HS though, you should have to risk more in the interest of a balanced game (if people other than you matter). As others have already said, the effort required to protect yourself in HS is simply too great. That's why nobody ever does it. Why don't we ever see bait freighters in HS? Right now, there's simply nothing to make that type of gameplay worth it for the other party. And for the record, I almost never fly in high sec. I just happen to realize that this aspect of the game is imbalanced and attracts only one particular type of player to the game while deterring others. I don't care much for tears, ganks and F1 turkey shoots though. It's not why I play. I play for real PvP. I don't have a problem with that play-style though, it's just that it shouldn't be a risk-free "I win" button in HS, which it is.
You missed out:
50% change of the item not dropping Being open to attack from anyone at -10 Being open to attack to everyone when you open fire on the target No insurance payout on Concorded ships Someone may steal your targets loot Someone may gank your hauler that is scooping the loot The target have a stronger tank than expected The target has an escort of ECM, logi, blap cruisers/BC. The target has a fleet booster Someone ganks your gank ships (you can make a profit on near all gank ships)
If CCP nerf ganking any more they will effectively end high sec piracy as it just wouldn't be viable for making isk. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12178
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 00:24:00 -
[73] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:
Believe it or not, many people find ganking boring af. Doesn't mean it's balanced.
A few dosen die out of millions of trips and you think the ganking is out of control and unbalanced?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12184
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 12:59:00 -
[74] - Quote
Lenn Elei wrote:tl;dr: a player with Criminal Timer shouldn't be able to abandon wreck
I'm not against the ganking aspect of Eve, however, I think that it's far too easy for the killer to abandon the wreck and let a neutral player loot it without any trouble.
You're in the street, someone steal your nice shiny bag and give it to someone else: do you really think the cops or even yourself should only run after the first guy (for 15 minutes) and leave the second with all your stuff? ;)
Therefore, my simple suggestion to limit this without nerfing too much the gankers is to disable or at least delay the possibility of abandoning a wreck when it comes from unauthorized actions?
Put it simple: someone with a criminal timer isn't able to take some actions: warping, docking, etc. and abandoning wrecks should be also forbidden.
In High Sec, that would mean that when someone ganks a ship, he couldn't simply abandon the wreck and let anyone, including that shiny neutral Orca waiting a few km away, loot it as he would immediately become suspect! I think this would had lot of fun ^^ and hopefully some fights!
Of course, that doesn't concern WT/NPC/legal wrecks.
Just one more nerf. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12196
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 18:18:00 -
[75] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: If you're set on using an indy ship, the procurer's got a reasonable scan res and four mids?
[Procurer, ecm] Signal Distortion Amplifier II Signal Distortion Amplifier II
'Hypnos' Ion Field ECM I 'Hypnos' Ion Field ECM I 'Hypnos' Ion Field ECM I 'Hypnos' Ion Field ECM I
[empty high slot]
Medium Targeting System Subcontroller I Medium Targeting System Subcontroller I Medium Targeting System Subcontroller I
Hornet EC-300 x5
e: had a better idea
It just feels wrong if its not a badger hull doing the ECM for some reason. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12196
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 18:22:00 -
[76] - Quote
malcovas Henderson wrote:Last night I finally had the time to go to Kamio, where I sat and watched Code go to play. The Idiocy amongst the mining community there was outstanding.
To watch Code in action is quite relaxing. Now I find ganking miners to be distasteful, but really. Those that are ganked thoroughly deserve it. Mining even when Gankers are in system, just shows the level of stupid in the game.
I knew stupid existed in the game, but not to this extent. I am almost ashamed to call myself a miner. Hats of to you Code, I might not like what you do, But by watching you in action you have earned my respect.
o7
When we ran our caldari ice interdiction we killed about 600 macks in two weeks. Despite having a month of warning not a single one fitted a tank.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12196
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 19:42:00 -
[77] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i might have posted the above too soon, there was already a more concrete answer in my mailbox. i've asked if it can be shared
There won't be.
It seems to change from GM to GM. At the time of our interdictions people did get warnings and temp bans for doing it but today it just isn't clear cut. As far as we are concerned its a legit tactic till CCP makes a clear statement its not. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12205
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 18:40:00 -
[78] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:
No no no you are sadly mistaken. It's not that ganking is extremely difficult and takes hours of coordination. It's the fact that it's difficult to find enough asshats in Eve who's sole desire is to **** off players for flying a hauler or mining ship. Every single one of us could undock today and shoot random pods or ships that are afk'ing or even actively flying around with no intention to PvP in high sec but guess what? That's not fun for a large majority of the EvE player base
Bring back 2003 and my corp will show you what a high sec slaughter looks like. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12206
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 19:58:00 -
[79] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:
As someone who has also just recently tried suicide ganking what exactly did you find difficult about it?
I mean most of the missioners we ganked didn't even shoot back.
I can guarantee you that you put in a lot more effort than your targets did. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12223
|
Posted - 2014.07.04 09:06:00 -
[80] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:Tippia wrote:[quote=malcovas Henderson] Quote:Quite simply that is the Gankers prey. They don't want to shoot combat ships. They want to shoot soft easy targets. GǪaaaand? Why do the gankers have to organise and go after a small selection of targets and the targets not organise at all? Just because the gankers pick among the targets that are available to them does not mean that the selection is ridiculously small and that this in and of itself highlights a massive imbalance. And no, playing that tanking your hull is not organising. Tanking your hull is fitting your ship. Absolutely no organisation is needed. Nice Pathetic try on the false equivocation though. Or waitGǪ no, it is nice, because when people start pulling out the fallacies like that, and like with the entire initial straw man, you already know where it's headed. Tippia you are so mad it's not even funny anymore. Quit trying to troll people so hard because you're starting to derail the thread. Take a breath, read what the other person actually wrote on the forums, and then post an answer that actually has some thought and discussion in it. The world will be okay, just take a deep breath. Now, to help you understand. Gankers don't have a small, minute target selection available to them through game-breaking mechanics. They limit their selection based on their own personal decisions: ISK. Why do you feel that catalyst are best option for ganking and that it should take 20-30 catalyst to gank an orca? It's ISK effieicent. Why do you feel that meta fit talos are effective in ganking large targets like freighters? It's ISK effieicent. If you are truly ganking people just to gank them, then finally let your balls drop and start flying 2.3k DPS vindicators and go gank those purple fit marauders running level 4's. Really gankers complain they can't easily kill someone who's put a lot of ISK into their ship using ships that are cheap and replaceable
Sure, lets spend several billion pointlessly to do the job of 20 t2 destroyers... Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12238
|
Posted - 2014.07.04 20:10:00 -
[81] - Quote
Altessa Post wrote:Sorry to tell you but I do not believe CCP that they really investigate into alt recycling.
I just witnessed a freighter gank where around 15 catalysts flew in with nice standing. Considering the current gank rate, the fact that it is always the same Machariel pilot doing the freighter bumping, I have a hard time believing that they recruit a new set of 10-20 pilots for a gank.
If CCP would enforce their own rules gankers would fly in being cherry red like the baboon derrieres they are. This would allow preventive actions against this pest. Having to wait until they become criminals just makes it more difficult.
If you think they are recycling then report them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12238
|
Posted - 2014.07.04 21:03:00 -
[82] - Quote
malcovas Henderson wrote:baltec1 wrote:
If you think they are recycling then report them.
I should imagine it is more a case of Disposable account. It takes what 3 weeks to create a gank char? That leaves a month if subbed that account. to go ganking. When sub runs out. stop using account and sub the next one. Maybe it is too much tinfoil, but definitely a possibility.
And spend all of that time getting those skills back only to get all of your accounts banned when CCP drops the hammer. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12240
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 04:46:00 -
[83] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:GM Lelouch wrote: One final clarification: Alt recycling is defined as the act of using a disposable character/account to perform actions which carry negative consequences within the game and then recycling (biomassing) the character to bypass said consequences and starting all over again with a new character.
1. Using an alt account to suicide gank and then farming up security status once it drops too low? This is totally okay with us. 2. Using an alt account to suicide gank and then deleting the character and replacing it with a new one once security status drops too low? This is not okay.
I am a little confused. Of what benefit is deleting the character with the low status (but with PvP skills) when you have to make a completely new character to replace him? Wouldn't the loss of a skilled character be a hindrance? I have done something like that with my mining characters. I gave a brand new character the isk and other assets owned by an established character (this is the established one), then retired the established character to the forum. I have given new characters the assets of more established characters before biomassing the older characters, tho. I have even stated multiple times in the forum I had done this and no one raised any alarms about 'recycling'. Wouldn't the loss of skills be considered a problem for PvP? My confusion is basically because I avoid PvP, I admit.
It will take more time to retrain the lost skillpoints than to simply go grind up your sec status. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12240
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 05:07:00 -
[84] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:GM Lelouch; Although avoiding consequences by alt recycling is not allowed, there is another way to avoid the consequences of suicide ganking that currently is allowed. My question: Should it be allowed? Players are getting around the entire "actions have consequences" basis of Eve. What are they doing?
They dedicate an alt to suicide ganking, and never bother fixing the low standings. Thus, the standing hit ceases to be a consequence. The entire system made by CCP is rendered irrelevant. Doing this violates no rule, but should the game really work that way? I propose a change:
One: If you are -5 or less, and; Have a criminal flag, and; lay the final blow on a ship, then; The insurance payout for that ship comes from your wallet.
Two: If you are -5 or less, and; have a negative wallet, then; You may not board, activate, or undock any ship bigger than a shuttle. Reason: All larger ships have a crew, and no crew will work for a criminal who has no money.
Will this stop suicide ganking? No, of course not. But it will return us to "actions have consequences".
CCP, stop pvp pilots from pvping in this pvp game.
That is literally what you just said. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12240
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 05:50:00 -
[85] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Tippia wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Is there any post that is too small for you to break into multiple quotes? Yes, one that only has a single point to respond to. Could you please answer the question? And to elaborate: why on earth should NPCs take over a job that players are meant to do? Sentamon wrote:Alts nullify any and all consequences of -10. How do alts keep your character from being blown up before it can do what it was trying to do? To do ... what? ... mine, run missions? No they don't, but for their main function in highsec, to gank, then yes they do. All the important parts of a gank are done with alts and with no consequences at all. (Equipping, Scouting, Scanning, Bumping). The last and final part is elementary.
And?
We have tens of thousands of alts for supplying nullsec to avoid wardecs too. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12241
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 06:06:00 -
[86] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: And?
We have tens of thousands of alts for supplying nullsec to avoid wardecs too.
... and we need to quit talking like there are meaningful consequences for ganking in highsec. There are none.
Aside from the fact that at -10 you are open to attack from everyone, gate and station guns open fire on you and cannot stay in any place longer then 30 seconds or have the faction navy warp in and kill you. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12244
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 06:18:00 -
[87] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Tell us how everyone can attack them while they sit in 100% safe stations while their high security alts do all the important work?
Remind us again how you gank people without undocking. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12245
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 06:27:00 -
[88] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:
Why would you want to do something stupid like that? You can use alts if you need something, like a shopping trip to Jita for example, and if you want to farm ISK then low/null and w-holes are far superior to highsec in every way.
Actually we have figured out how to earn null anom level income from high sec level 3 missions. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12246
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 06:54:00 -
[89] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:DJentropy Ovaert wrote: Stop expecting CONCORD to do your work for you.
Sure, right after CONCORD stops protecting your bumbers and ship scanners. And right after you quit moving CONCORD to give yourself more gank time. Deal?
So remove concord. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12250
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 18:42:00 -
[90] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote:So many future war targets in this thread it is truly a beautiful site.
All I need now is ISK to fund it all. Anybody want their isk doubled?
I would like to point out. Even though I am not a ganker (Yes I tried it, don't like it) For those that said that bears don't get punished for insults. I can as a matter of fact point to a few that has been punished after calling me a few unkind words via email or chat.
Nobody that knows you doubts your vengeance. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12254
|
Posted - 2014.07.06 08:40:00 -
[91] - Quote
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
how about rigs or fitting that: 1. do NOT alter flight characteristics, 2. take up large amounts of ore hold (thus removing the ability to actually mine profitably), but add 3. high slots for weapons 4. shielding 5. and/or power
1. Welcome to every single ship in EVE. Ever seen what 3 trimark rigs will do to slow down a megathron?
2. CCP are not going to give you the best of all worlds, if you want more tank you have to sacrifice your hold.
3. You have drones, use them.
4. They did buff mining barge tanks.
5. Again, they did just that. You are not going to get the CPU/grid to fit the very best of everything, they are designed so that you have to make choices. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12254
|
Posted - 2014.07.06 08:42:00 -
[92] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:You know what I don't get, I loot some scrap worth 300 isk from some wreck the guy probably doesn't even want, and everyone can blow me to bits for 15 mins, but I go around scanning ships and sizing them up for a loss that can go into the Billions of ISK and no suspect flag, not even for 10 seconds, and the scan is pretty much instant giving the mark no chance to resist. How convenient.
Who comes up with this stuff, everyone knows that in EVE the real fight happens before the shooting starts.
You stole something, the scanner did no harm to anyone.
Thats the difference. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12260
|
Posted - 2014.07.06 18:26:00 -
[93] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:hah! right, scanning is far more suspicious and harmful then stealing some veldspar. Of course you don't want suspect flags because an actual fight instead of a gank that pretty much is a guaranteed win scares poor little gankbears.
Yea, your speaking to the people willing to risk trillions of isk in capital brawls. The only people looking for risk free gameplay are the nerf ganking bears. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12260
|
Posted - 2014.07.06 18:59:00 -
[94] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:70 pages so far of carebears and gankbears proving they won't undock if it means risking anything of value.
Only, gankers do undock. Hence all of the bears exploding. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12265
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 21:55:00 -
[95] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Kal Murmur wrote: It's amusing though that the accuracy of the data only started being challenged once it showed a conclusion contrary to the one people were hoping for. What's amusing to me is that you think there were less than six hundred suicide ganks for the entire year of 2009. That disqualifies your entire set of data by itself. Even if you drop out anything earlier then 2012 do to unreliability there is still a huge trend upwards with each year doubling its predecessor. Edit: 2014 is actually on pace to triple 2013
No its not.
on average 6 freighters are ganked per day out of tens of thousands of trips. CCP have themselves said that miner ganking has never been lower. Ganking as a whole has dropped massivly from the days of M0o. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12265
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 22:17:00 -
[96] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:baltec1 wrote: on average 6 freighters are ganked per day out of tens of thousands of trips. CCP have themselves said that miner ganking has never been lower. Ganking as a whole has dropped massivly from the days of M0o.
If it was anybody but you that said that... But since you are one of the forum personalities most well known for just pulling 'facts' out of your ass, I'll just ignore it. Mr Epeen
I never make up bullshit. Feel free to go check up on what I said. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12266
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 22:39:00 -
[97] - Quote
Aischa Montagne wrote:baltec1 wrote:
I never make up bullshit. Feel free to go check up on what I said.
This sentences usually mean that Mr Epeen is right. If you realy want to prove your righteouses you should quote and reference your source and not waste other peoples times.
You have access to evekills records, go look up ganked freighters. You can find CCPs statements easy enough and M0o were the first professional pirates back in 2003.
Fact is that ganking has never been lower than today. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12267
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 01:22:00 -
[98] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Have you ever actually ganked someone, or are you just saying stuff in an attempt to feel relevant? To be honest, I've never ganked anyone in HS. There were a few times I wanted to tag along with others but my sec status was too low. I've ganked occasionally in other space but in general I just play EVE for those more engaging fights. So yeah, I'm hardly an expert. But I think the concepts involved here are pretty simple, in that if I did either ganking or hauling I know what I would think is balanced. I post stuff here to give my opinion. Others can respond to points if they feel they are valid or invalid and explain why, and CCP can take that feedback to make the game better. My opinion is that it's boring to have to worry about scouting an empty ship in HS. Freighters, jump freighters, and things like machs and vindis are the most extreme examples. If you are ganked with nothing in your cargo, and you *fit for tank*, the gankers should have to spend an amount of ISK at least somewhat close to your hull value, otherwise it seems like a silly mechanic. I do think it's imbalanced that you can gank a reinforced bulkhead fit freighter with only 200mil worth of catalysts at a cost of over 1.3 bil to the one guy who's only recourse to prevent such a fate would have been to do something that makes the game more boring for him.
Gank cost based upon the pricetag of the target is a terrible idea. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12267
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 02:12:00 -
[99] - Quote
Quote: But why though? I never said the cost needs to be used directly in-game for any calculations. I'm not sure why it shouldn't be a balancing factor though.
EDIT: sorry, didn't see your megathron example. No one says you need to use catalysts. And there's no reason why the mechanics for gankers can't be re-balanced as well to provide a way to kill higher valued targets quickly, but at a higher cost, if that's needed to make it more balanced. It seems like a good thing if the gankers had more options to play with too to support more variable fleet sizes.
It is not a good thing to have a megathron sporting a tank greater than two fleets of titans. You are not adding options you are destroying high sec piracy and badly breaking the game. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12267
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 02:14:00 -
[100] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: Hey guys, I have these ideas that CCP laughed at on several occasions. I have no experience on either side of the fence but that doesn't make me wrong.
I guess you have to personally experience murder to know it's bad to allow that in society right? I don't know if CCP laughs at these ideas, wouldn't surprise me. It sounds like they know what they're doing though, you know, given the massive layoffs and all.
People pvping in a pvp game is now akin to murder... Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12269
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 02:50:00 -
[101] - Quote
Gavin Dax wrote:baltec1 wrote: It is not a good thing to have a megathron sporting a tank greater than two fleets of titans. You are not adding options you are destroying high sec piracy and badly breaking the game.
Nowhere did I suggest this.
This is what you get when you base tank on isk cost of the hull. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12276
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 20:43:00 -
[102] - Quote
Kal Murmur wrote:Tippia wrote:So what you're saying is that suicide ganking needs to be buffed, since not only do you have no element of surprise in the instant-intel world of EVE, but you also have a very minute selection of targets and even among that selection, the targets are largely self-selected rather than something the gankers can pick and choose from. Please be better at the game. Pick a moderately busy system with ice anomaly, wait for ice to respawn + 10-20 minutes for the flock of Orcas and barges to arrive, wait another 30 minutes for the miners to start nodding off from the sheer tedium of ice mining, enter sys, ship up and farm tears. Alternatively if you want freighters, sit on any busy trade route with a side system. If people are going to gank carebears at least have the good grace to stop pretending that it's oh so difficult.
Go gank a fleet of supertank skiffs, tell me its easy and profitable. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12276
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 20:46:00 -
[103] - Quote
Da Dom wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Da Dom wrote:The risk of undocking in high sec is increasing rapidly and the rewards for doing so need to be buffed... Big time The opposite is true. Highsec has never been safer, that is, if you bother to even attempt to defend yourself anyway. In fact, highsec mechanics pay out far too well for such risk free activity. https://zkillboard.com/kill/39898757/
The story
He killed himself. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12277
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 21:34:00 -
[104] - Quote
Dally Lama wrote:@Malak @Kaarous
Kind of sad to see you two get so aggressive because of someone's opinion on high-sec ganking. Referencing Dax from Razor.
I actually agree with you guys... just not with your attitudes. It's honestly not hard to show respect for someone, even if you think their opinion is dumb. Only children lack the ability to do this. Properly functioning adults do not.
Even worse for Malak, considering this is a coalition mate. If I were Mittens I'd slap you silly for being such a git.
Clearly you dont know much about the CFC culture. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12294
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 16:55:00 -
[105] - Quote
Whenever someone comes out with null is safer tripe I tell them to run a simple test.
Take an empty, unfitted badger and park it on one of the busy jita gates, see how long it is before someone attacks.
Next take an unfitted badger and park it on a busy null sec gate. Keep on replacing the null sec badger untill the one in jita gets killed. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12294
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 16:56:00 -
[106] - Quote
Boom McCondor wrote:GM Karidor wrote:CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis. I'm just wondering how this comes into play when a couple of Machs are chain bumping a freighter in Uedama. Obviously the freighter has NOTHING ELSE TO DO but try and move on to another location; they don't have the capability to do anything else.
Have corp mates bump the machs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12297
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 17:29:00 -
[107] - Quote
Darek Castigatus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whenever someone comes out with null is safer tripe I tell them to run a simple test.
Take an empty, unfitted badger and park it on one of the busy jita gates, see how long it is before someone attacks.
Next take an unfitted badger and park it on a busy null sec gate. Keep on replacing the null sec badger untill the one in jita gets killed. This is something I'd actually quite like to see the results of, not that I'm in any doubt as to what they would show but the idea is interesting. You could also try running a hauler through a busy nullsec area for the same number of jumps it takes to get from jita to your mission hub of choice, again comparing the number of haulers lost on each route.
Well we do have numbers on this.
CCP gave us the numbers of ships killed in each area of space. Surprise surprise null sec came out on top with millions more ship deaths than in high sec despite having a fraction of the population. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12305
|
Posted - 2014.07.10 10:56:00 -
[108] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:
Would be interesting to see what percentage of freighters get ganked, although it's area specific no doubt.
An average of about 6 a day out of tens of thousands of trips. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12309
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 04:10:00 -
[109] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whenever someone comes out with null is safer tripe I tell them to run a simple test.
Take an empty, unfitted badger and park it on one of the busy jita gates, see how long it is before someone attacks.
Next take an unfitted badger and park it on a busy null sec gate. Keep on replacing the null sec badger untill the one in jita gets killed. now.. put 20 plexes inside... and the jita one suddenly gets popped way faster . Irrelevant situatiosn are not a good argument sorry. Usually you present reasonable ones, but that was not.
How so?
The point is to show that null sec is far more dangerous, this unfitted badger test is as simple as it gets and will clearly show which area is the more dangerous. A badger with 20 plex in it is far from normal. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12312
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 04:18:00 -
[110] - Quote
Puppy Eating wrote:malcovas Henderson wrote:Grog Aftermath wrote:
Using scouts is a bit difficult if you have only one character, hiring bodyguards may make the trip not cost effective.
If you have made it to flying a Freighter without making friends. Then you should not be playing MMO's Implying friends exist in EVE. A 'friend' is just someone you haven't betrayed yet
Its funny how I have total trust with other goons when moving my stuff from deployment to deployment yet you more civilised people have nobody you can trust. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12317
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 12:09:00 -
[111] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
You know very well that it is not so simple. But when you can afford to suicide gank any battleship with 80m on its modules, then its borderline dumb.
What's borderline dumb is getting ganked in a battleship with any amount of mods on, because if you're in a battleship, then you've been playing the game long enough to learn how to use one. That, or you were borderline dumb, bought a toon already skilled for one and a battleship was your first foray into EVE.
Again, its funny how my Megathron can take the firepower of several hundred other ships in fleet fights yet they whine that they cannot tank vs 20 destroyers. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12323
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 16:44:00 -
[112] - Quote
Grinder2210 wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Some men just want to watch the world burn.
There's space for us all in New Eden.
Unless your me .... Than you have your home made into a rookie system ...... And told that even with a employment history going back years well um that player my still be a rookie .......... No love for the CanFliper in eve
Can flipping is dead. What happened to can flipping is what bears want to do to all forms of pvp in high sec that can impact them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12329
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 18:49:00 -
[113] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Good try. But knowing where you do the ganking, in systems (specially some of the most lucrative), where the missioners will nto be tanking against Thermal.. you are facing 50K EHP on most marauders.
I jsut wish battleships would have a tad more EHP so that would not be a problem.
Why are you not fitting an omni tank on it? Its not like it needs a lot of slots for its tank. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12342
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 23:16:00 -
[114] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: 50k is an unsurprising number for a 3 slot tank with no DCU.
I cut to the most important part. If you choose to sacrifice a DCU for more deeps, then you get what you get. Personally, if I am going to fly in something that costs a few months of game time, I am going to fit a DCU. Especially given how many of these people claim that they've been ruined if they lose their blingship? Why on earth do they not fit a proper tank?
Whats more, you do not need a faction tank on these ships. Not a single level 4 mission requires more than a t2 tank. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12342
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 23:18:00 -
[115] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Don't fly it as a blingship and you can have both, unless you find someone ganking for fun, in which case DCU or no it doesn't matter.
I have seen golems tank 40 man gangs before now. You can run missions with a pvp setup in these things easily and in pvp they are downright deadly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12344
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 23:56:00 -
[116] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:baltec1 wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Don't fly it as a blingship and you can have both, unless you find someone ganking for fun, in which case DCU or no it doesn't matter.
I have seen golems tank 40 man gangs before now. You can run missions with a pvp setup in these things easily and in pvp they are downright deadly. You can, though I'd question why if loss from ganking is that much of a concern to run in a PvP fit as you can risk much less for more effect at that point in a T2 RNI. Aside from being bait (or heavy NPC ewar) why would you chose the Golem?
Because it has the best subcap tank going and the firepower to bring the pain. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12345
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 00:19:00 -
[117] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:baltec1 wrote:Because it has the best subcap tank going and the firepower to bring the pain. The RNI has the same damage output and another BCU when a DCU is involved on both ships. While the tank makes a nice number for a bait ship, for a ship actually focused on PvE and not PvP and also not overstuffed with faction/deadspace gear it does about the same at half the cost, hence why it seems iffy for me.
Golem has better damage application and range. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12345
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 00:23:00 -
[118] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Honest question, do you really use the difference in range? When I'm in a Golem I'm usually in TP range. Also at longer ranges I'd think the RNI would start to catch up in application since TP's start to miss while the explosion radius bonus of the RNI remains constant.
Makes all the difference with torps. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12356
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 16:09:00 -
[119] - Quote
DreamWizard wrote:Code. killswas fun to watch the other day all them freighters lol it use to be a ban able offence if you eluded concord this was implemented back in the day when mOw would tank concord and kill anything that came at them lol. it has gotten way to easy to do and them stats show it. Yes a lot of no tank setups but still lol I think it needs to be look at and updated
There were 44, 002 jumps in and out of jita yesterday. 396 ships were destroyed, along with 297 pods.
A few dosen of those ships killed were ganked.
Where is the out of control ganking? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12358
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 19:30:00 -
[120] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:
Well then I guess we can both agree don't travel to Uedama on a monday, eh?
Only if you have several billion in the hold.
My freighter is several years old and never once has been shot at despite being used several times a day near every day.
Fact is that the average number of freighter ganks stands at around 6-10 out of tens of thousands of trips a day. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12362
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 17:00:00 -
[121] - Quote
Kal Murmur wrote:Riyria Twinpeaks wrote:Yeah, 15 people on either side repeating the same arguments in different words for 99 pages is clearly indicative for how rare or often the subject of discussion is. Well every time we've tried to pull actual data, it's just dismissed out of hand despite each set showing exactly the same trend. I guess that's what happens when a handful of suicide gankers sense their favourite pastime might be at risk as a result of their own reckless actions. I'm pretty bored now, so I'll just leave you with the words of James 315 in his latest post on BumpMining..
CCP data shows barge ganking at an all time low.
An average of 6-10 freighters die out of tens of thousands of trips made a day.
There is no evidence of out of control ganking. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12362
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 17:02:00 -
[122] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:
There was a very strong trend in 2012, 2013, 2014 with each year showing huge growth (over a 50% increase) in both # of concord kills and # of charon losses. As for the wardec issue the data was compiled from the same source, unless there was some patch between 2012-2014 that would have increased the number of wardecs significantly it would be safe to assume the % lost to wardecs would remain constant throughout.
I think we did it guys this has to be 100! I'm proud of each and every one of you.
We already told you why what you just said is wrong. Many times. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12362
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 17:43:00 -
[123] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:baltec1 wrote:Organic Lager wrote:
There was a very strong trend in 2012, 2013, 2014 with each year showing huge growth (over a 50% increase) in both # of concord kills and # of charon losses. As for the wardec issue the data was compiled from the same source, unless there was some patch between 2012-2014 that would have increased the number of wardecs significantly it would be safe to assume the % lost to wardecs would remain constant throughout.
I think we did it guys this has to be 100! I'm proud of each and every one of you.
We already told you why what you just said is wrong. Many times. Really? must have missed that post. All I ever saw in refute to this was: "I personally haven't seen any change, therefore it's not true". Or "The boards weren't combined until 2012" - no problem just look at 2013 onward Or "Wardecs and other" - as mentioned this should remain consistent throughout the data sets. Or "We have to use cheaper ships right meow because nerfs" - between 2013-2014? You know what never mind, we hit 100 the goal has been achieved, peace.
We moved from using one or two high alpha battleships to lots of high DPS small ships. The killboards also did not track concord kills unless they were posted by the ganker, which was rare, that is where the "zomg concord are killing more ships that must mean more people are being ganked!
This is wrong, we went from 5 gankers to 20-30 per kill. It would also require you to ignore the fact that CCP themselves have shown that barge ganking has never been lower and that there are near no ganking kills showing up to constitute out of control ganking.
Ganking today is nothing like in the past, not even close. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12363
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 17:54:00 -
[124] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:baltec1 wrote:Ganking today is nothing like in the past, not even close. Time for a demonstration of how things used to be? *batphones Helicity Boson
Even that is lowballing it.
Go back to the terror that was M0o, who could shut down a high sec system and kill everything while tanking concord. They killed thousands in a matter of hours and were only stopped when CCP teleported them to the far corners of null sec. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12366
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 18:41:00 -
[125] - Quote
Kal Murmur wrote:
Can people stop using this statistic of # of jumps/trips please, it's utterly irrelevant to the impact ganking has on the game. The relevant metric is active freighters unless every freighter pilot is only carrying out a single jump or trip in the relevant time period. It's just picking out big numbers because they make a problem look insignificant.
Does anyone know how to get the data on number of active freighter in a time period?
There are tens of thousands of trips made every day by freighters, it is entirely relevant because THAT is the ship you are going on about. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12366
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 03:51:00 -
[126] - Quote
Kal Murmur wrote:baltec1 wrote:There are tens of thousands of trips made every day by freighters, it is entirely relevant because THAT is the ship you are going on about. Not really. If there's only a small number of freighter pilots doing a lot of trips/jumps then that's whats relevant to the number of freighters being popped. Bear in mind that the number of jumps your average courier would need to recoup the cost of a lost freighter is seriously substantial.
Doesnt matter if its just one pilot, its still tens of thousands of trips. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12368
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 17:13:00 -
[127] - Quote
Kal Murmur wrote:Sibyyl wrote:The fact is, suicide ganking is mandated by CCP and EVE's rules.. and gankers seem to be forced to justify something that is mandated and legal against suggestions in this thread that run counter to CCP's position on the matter. I'm just saying the burden should be on someone suggesting rules changes to adequately study and describe the long term and macro-scale impacts of their suggestions before they insist that their direction is supreme. About the last thing I'd like to happen is a rule change/nerf. Leaving CCP to nerf things is basically a guarantee of horrible unexpected consequences that will likely result in everyone losing out. It's just almost certainly going to end up being what happens if people don't start acting a little more responsibly.
Why would it?
There is no evidence to show that ganking is anything but rare. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12391
|
Posted - 2014.07.18 06:32:00 -
[128] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:If there's one thing you can always count on in here, it's: Baltec = It's all high secs fault Remiel = It's the damn carebears fault Rhes = It's all because of Incarna Kaarous = It's the bloody anti ganker's fault At least they're consistent *) so you don't need to ever actually read what they post. Mr Epeen *) *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Mr Epeen = I cant attack the facts so I will attack the person Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12402
|
Posted - 2014.07.18 22:10:00 -
[129] - Quote
Organic Lager wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Proselytos wrote: This would add a lot of more fun, realism, and stops certain simple minded exploits which are only possible because of a lack of realism.
Yes, the lack of realism in a fictional fluid universe space submarine game is the problem. People who cry about "realism" in a video game in which players are immortal because cloning + sci fi magic are a special kind of person. I think you're nit picking, not saying I agree with him or think they should remove bumping. The issue isn't with realism obviously it's a video game and there are tons of things that don't make sense or jive with actual physics but we let them go because they make sense in the game. However, having a frig 1/1000 the size of a freighter harmlessly bounce off each other seems to really stretch the bounds. Every other spaceship/flying game i can think of has some sort of collision damage.
Jita 4-4 undock would be a graveyard as countless ships ram into eachother. And we WILL build a wall of freighters on that undock. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12406
|
Posted - 2014.07.19 17:22:00 -
[130] - Quote
Ilovetomine wrote:I can't even move around space without someone following me with the intention of ganking me. Whether it be in a pve ship/mining ship, or freighter/hauler. There isnt even really any point in playing if you can't enjoy the game. I have been sitting in a station for months just training skills...
And before being called carebear, most of my pvp experience has been logistics, or small fleet stuff. It's different when you go out in a pvp ship, you expect to blow up.... Rather than being in a mission site and being probed out for the sake of hassling you..
What's the point of eve these days anyways.
You dont get followed all the time, hell you likely haven even seen a gank given the odds are less than 0.5%.
What you have is just run of the mill paranoia, everyone gets that. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12406
|
Posted - 2014.07.19 17:27:00 -
[131] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Jita 4-4 undock would be a graveyard as countless ships ram into eachother. And we WILL build a wall of freighters on that undock.
Wouldn't work anyway, if there was collision damage you would have CONCORD turn up and destroy the aggressor even if it was an accident. CONCORD would probably build that wall quicker than you.
You would be crashing into my wall, you are the agressor. Concord would be doing my ganking for me. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12447
|
Posted - 2014.07.21 04:00:00 -
[132] - Quote
Paynus Maiassus wrote:Didn't bother to read the previous 110 pages lol.
Just wanted to chime in and say that a major factor in my decision to move to null sec was that null is safer than high.
Oh boy are you in for a world of pain and crushed dreams. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12540
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 16:06:00 -
[133] - Quote
Noragli wrote:Sibyyl wrote:Noragli wrote:Because I posted this thread and my opinion on the state of ganking does not mean I am not allowed to gank an Orca. You're allowed to do anything you want within the operating rules of the sandbox. However, it does seem hypocritical for you to want to gank another player's ship while simultaneously (1) creating a complaint thread about being ganked yourself (or your friends, or whoever), and (2) seeking out advice from the very people you have created this thread as a complaint against. It's not hypocritical. A one off gank of an Orca is vastly difference than a large group of organised players who play the game solely for the purpose of ganking as many ships as they can, even when there is no profit to be had. Empty freighters, even when tanked, are sometimes killed just because they can (proof that ganking is too easy or that the punishment is not severe enough) It's not specifically ganking by itself that is the problem, it's that people are now taking it too far and efforts should be made to curb that behaviour.
So you want to nerf a profession into the ground because there is a less than 1% chance you will get ganked... Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12543
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 06:54:00 -
[134] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:Surprisingly light on the grr Goons in this thread. A little disappointing actually. We must be slipping. Maybe we should burn Jita for a month straight since it doesn't look like a war is likely this summer. Burning Jita is so 2011. If you guys really want to dip your sacks in the punch bowl, just send a fleet to highsec and start taking out Sansha motherships the minute they appear. Trust me on this. You want hate mail? You'll get the post office. (I know from experience)
I would rather go blow up the bling boats they use. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12543
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 07:57:00 -
[135] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:baltec1 wrote:I would rather go blow up the bling boats they use. No reason we can't do both.
And it would mean I might get my hands on a giant space turd... Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12543
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 08:33:00 -
[136] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:pretty sure its only from null incursions which is why they are so rare.
Isnt it low sec too?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12546
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:32:00 -
[137] - Quote
Luna Lockhearts wrote: Ever since they added the option of fixing status with tags, ganking has just sky rocketed, there is no consequences to ganking, and even before the tags people would just create a new character in one of their spare slots, train it to a destroyer that takes all of a few hours, gank then delete and do it again, over and over, without any issues.
Gonna stop you right there.
Nobody who ganks uses tags, they cost a fortune and are pointless. Most don't even bother to grin up status either as its just not worth the time, we just stay -10.
As for just making a new alt and recycling. That is a bannable offence and isn't done.
Ganking is not out of control and is not at record levels. It is infact at its lowest level for the last decade. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12561
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 03:54:00 -
[138] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:baltec1 wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:baltec1 wrote:I would rather go blow up the bling boats they use. No reason we can't do both. And it would mean I might get my hands on a giant space turd... I'm sure as a baby your diaper leaked just like everybody else's.
I would say they are more solid than runny due to it being lumpy. Kinda like one the day after a heavy drinking session and a kebab that was a bit too big but you ate it all anyway. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12658
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 03:19:00 -
[139] - Quote
Phoenix22 wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Phoenix22 wrote:It will not help you, tank ore no tank CODE ore Goonswarm will gank you no matter how hard you try Please keep your ignorance to yourself. It is nearly impossible to kill the fit you are referring to unless you are both really organized and really lucky. U someone is angry o wait you are the CODE ore Goonswarm
He speaks truth. Blockade runners when flown right are near impossible to catch in high sec. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12732
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 08:24:00 -
[140] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:While we're modifying the bumping mechanics, why don't we also add a 'Ram & Board' button as well? That way my cargo of light marines can board and extract the precious in the hold of whatever vessel is locked into place in this fashion. It could even be another handy use for the Anchoring skill.
Or we could just leave the mechanic alone and adapt to it, just sayin.
They need to bring back Battlefleet Gothic.
Still wondering why they havent based a game on that. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12734
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 15:58:00 -
[141] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:Try to keep it on topic, kids. I know you undoubtedly have nothing going on in your lives and that is why you are constantly posting in every thread, but you need to respect forum rules if you are going to make the EVE forums your social life.
Try to address this question: Why should suicide ganking be the only high profit, low cost, zero risk activity in the game?
EVE is supposed to have risk vs reward. Currently, suicide gankers aren't playing the same game as the rest of us with regards to that.
Ramming a frigate through a cruiser is much like suicide ganking in EVE. Funny, effective and man did they rage. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12738
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 16:53:00 -
[142] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Sorry, but he didn't prove anything at all. It makes no sense for a 1.35 bil ship to try to gank an incursus. The example he gave is totally ridiculous and unrealistic. Honestly feel bad for you that you don't realize this.
Its the other way round. HE was the incursus that killed the 1.35 bil ship. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12885
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:46:00 -
[143] - Quote
Derrick Miles wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: To Quote CCP Falcon " 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." This means that in the view of CCP CONCORD IS a police force.
You've got me there, but I called him out on that as well, and I think the only way you can consider CONCORD a police force is in a role-playing scenario. No police force in the world metes out the same punishment to repeat offenders as it does to first timers.
Generally speaking people put to death in the real world don't tend to get up and do it again. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12895
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:30:00 -
[144] - Quote
Derrick Miles wrote: They're not really putting pilots to death if they wake up in a station a second after their ship blows up. Unless we get into some existentialism here, which I admit might be more interesting than where this thread has been going lately.
Sure they are. You died which is why clone number 175 woke up (unless your the broker, that guy has dozens of himself wandering around at any one time). Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12912
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 07:41:00 -
[145] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
A. Ganking is exploding in popularity, it's entirely too easy, and the entire game is suffering and will shut down if we don't get a handle on it now, or;
Actually ganking is at a record low and has never been more punished or risk as today.
Lady Areola Fappington wrote: B. Ganking has utterly no effect on anything or anyone all we need to do is ignore it to make it go away.
Ganking has resulted in a good many changes from the introduction of invicible concord to gate/station gun buffs, the barge changes and to the freighter nerf the other month. It is the single most punished activity in EVE and the riskiest after years of nerfs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12912
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:38:00 -
[146] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:baltec1 wrote:Ganking has resulted in a good many changes from the introduction of invicible concord to gate/station gun buffs, the barge changes and to the freighter nerf the other month. It is the single most punished activity in EVE and the riskiest after years of nerfs. Doesn't seem very risky to me. You're protected up until the moment you open fire, if you get it right you get your kill. As for losing your ship to CONCORD, there is no risk as it's a given and you've already factored that lose into the gank.
Most gankers are not protected due to being under -5 sec status. The fact that concord will blow up your ship every time does not remove the fact that it is a hefty punishment. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12912
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:48:00 -
[147] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:baltec1 wrote:Grog Aftermath wrote:baltec1 wrote:Ganking has resulted in a good many changes from the introduction of invicible concord to gate/station gun buffs, the barge changes and to the freighter nerf the other month. It is the single most punished activity in EVE and the riskiest after years of nerfs. Doesn't seem very risky to me. You're protected up until the moment you open fire, if you get it right you get your kill. As for losing your ship to CONCORD, there is no risk as it's a given and you've already factored that lose into the gank. Most gankers are not protected due to being under -5 sec status. The fact that concord will blow up your ship every time does not remove the fact that it is a hefty punishment. Normally the ship you attack is worth more than what you're using to blow it up, so I don't see that as a hefty punishment, seems quite light to me. Also gankers usually have someone ready to fly in to pick up the loot from the wreaks, both the target and the lost gank ship so that should help keep their loses down, in most cases probably a profit. So yeah, not hefty at all.
It is hefty, you just don't want it to be.
But hey, if you think the punishments and risks for ganking are too low to not matter than I guess you would be fine have the exact same mechanics put onto say, mission running. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12912
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:01:00 -
[148] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:baltec1 wrote: But hey, if you think the punishments and risks for ganking are too low to not matter than I guess you would be fine have the exact same mechanics put onto say, mission running.
Ooh, ooh, pick me! How about we make it so that mission runners with a sec standing above 3.0 are constantly chased by pirates (who don't drop loot), just like gankers are chased by facpo? Nah, just have them lose the same standing per ship killed as gankers do. Idk, people basically don't do faction missions anyway.
Oh I mean any missions in high sec. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12912
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:02:00 -
[149] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:baltec1 wrote:But hey, if you think the punishments and risks for ganking are too low to not matter than I guess you would be fine have the exact same mechanics put onto say, mission running. You said the punishments were heavy I said they were light. I didn't say they were too low, too low would imply they need to be harsher. As for mission running, those mechanics wouldn't work. Thanks for reminding me about missions, been months since I've done one, maybe I should try a couple for old times sake.
So if you arn't willing to take the same punishments and risks then they arnt light. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12914
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:11:00 -
[150] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:
It makes no sense in relation to missions, in missions you're shooting at criminals or invading factions. Gankers are criminals, do you see the link there?
CONCORD doesn't like criminals, it means they have to do something other than other sit eating doughnuts.
Doesn't matter about the lore, what matters is you wouldn't do mission with those punishments and risks. Therefore you cant say there are no risks or punishments for ganking or that they are too low. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12914
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:27:00 -
[151] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:baltec1 wrote:Grog Aftermath wrote:
It makes no sense in relation to missions, in missions you're shooting at criminals or invading factions. Gankers are criminals, do you see the link there?
CONCORD doesn't like criminals, it means they have to do something other than other sit eating doughnuts.
Doesn't matter about the lore, what matters is you wouldn't do mission with those punishments and risks. Therefore you cant say there are no risks or punishments for ganking or that they are too low. You wouldn't be able to even completed a mission if you were the criminal. So there wouldn't be any combat missions, like I said it wouldn't/couldn't work with missions. You're using that 'too low' again, like I said it's light not too low. Light because unless you're just ganking for the hell of it (isk not even an issue) then what you're ganking if worth far more than the lose of your ship that you knew you would lose and factored in to the cost of the gank. If you want tougher penalties be my guest and continue to talk about 'too low'.
80 mil for a gank nado is not exactly light on the pocket and you are not garenteed to either get the kill or the drop. So no, its not light, you lose your ship as a punishment. If you faced that with a mission you simply wouldn't do missions, as you said.
Hell, I bet you wouldn't do missions if it was just the sec loss. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12914
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 11:41:00 -
[152] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:
For there to be risk there has to be more than 1 possible outcome.
Assuming a ganker isn't just doing it for the hell of it, then the only risk they face is will they make a profit or a loss. If suicide ganking didn't pay, suicide ganking wouldn't exist other than suicide ganking just for the hell of it.
You lose your ship, that's your choice you chose to lose your ship as part of the gank. You are using your ships as disposable tools to try and make a profit.
That also applies to the people hauling their stuff around, their ships are just as disposable. Its their choice to fit an anti-tank, its their choice to go unescorted and its their choice to overstuff it.
Grog Aftermath wrote: As for missions, main reason I'd do a mission is for corp. standing, which has nothing to do with sec loss.
Sec loss achieved by actively being involved in criminal behaviour, well that's not going to happen to me as I'd don't get involved with criminal behaviour. There's no reason for a missioner to get sec loss from killing criminals.
Again, forget about how missions work and the lore. This is simply a demonstrasion that you would not do missions if you faced the same punishments and risk as gankers do. Thus showing that the punishments and risk are infact, not light and easily brushed aside. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12915
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 11:58:00 -
[153] - Quote
Lets go over todays Iteron V bad choices.
Firstly, he chose an iteron V to haul near 400 million in cargo. This was mistake number one, he picked the wrong ship for the job or if thats all he could fly, he chose to not make several trips.
Second mistake is the lack of a tank. Just look at that, not a single tanking mod to be seen and worse yet, the mods he did fit all reduce the tank. This is the classical anti-tank fit.
Third mistake, he was AFK. A sin all to common among haulers and miners alike.
Fourth mistake, he was on autopilot. Now by itself its not a bad tool, however when you are in an anti-tanked t1 hauler with 400 mil in the bay it is just asking for trouble.
This haulers choices are what caused his death, the ganker just happened to be in the right place at the right time and got lucky. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12917
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 13:17:00 -
[154] - Quote
shaun 27 wrote:Like to see fines declined insurance payouts as well as sec status loss. If you get all 3 right it will discourage low level ganking but high value targets will still pay. Also if you go into negative wallet concord revoke your right to even sit in a ship in empire 0.5 to 1.0. Sec status would not effect ability to pilot ships in 0.5 to 1.0. That would make ganking empty freighters not worth while but ones which carry lots isk well your own fault because you didn't have a webber with you. But as to ccps repeated comments about getting guns etc, they dont do much if you get ganked and half the time these people dont undock unless they have a target already lined up or have alts which rep etc from my experience. So getting that bitter sweet revenge as im sure your on about doesn't happen much. Let me know when a position becomes open within concord i have amazing plans
We already get no insurance payout on any gank ship and sec loss. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12917
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 13:28:00 -
[155] - Quote
shaun 27 wrote:Then added some fines as well as the above you mentioned should work but you goons are all filthy rich so i suppose it wouldn't work on you
Why add them at all? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12919
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 13:37:00 -
[156] - Quote
shaun 27 wrote:
err to make it less rewarding
You can do that by simply not transporting 400 mil in an anti-tanked iteron V AFK while on autopilot. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12921
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 14:26:00 -
[157] - Quote
shaun 27 wrote:
on about killboard stats ie killing hulk with a catalyst cost to kill ratios
This can be avoided entirely by flying a well tanked skiff. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12925
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 15:14:00 -
[158] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lets go over todays Iteron V bad choices. Firstly, he chose an iteron V to haul near 400 million in cargo. This was mistake number one, he picked the wrong ship for the job or if thats all he could fly, he chose to not make several trips. Second mistake is the lack of a tank. Just look at that, not a single tanking mod to be seen and worse yet, the mods he did fit all reduce the tank. This is the classical anti-tank fit. Third mistake, he was AFK. A sin all to common among haulers and miners alike. Fourth mistake, he was on autopilot. Now by itself its not a bad tool, however when you are in an anti-tanked t1 hauler with 400 mil in the bay it is just asking for trouble. This haulers choices are what caused his death, the ganker just happened to be in the right place at the right time and got lucky. His first mistake was to play a broken POS game like EVE where aggressors have all the advantages. His only crime was not knowing everything about the game. Its normal the the victims of suicide gankers are newer players who do not understand such things are possible. The question remains whether he will unsub or not now. Certainly not worth the cost of fueling the entitlement of the common suicide ganker. These are the types of players that suicide gankers prey on out of fear of real pvp.
Now he knows not to do that. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12927
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 15:37:00 -
[159] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:One question I have is, Why do suicide gankers feel entitled sit on a gate in high sec and wait around for a fat juicy noob to come hauling his entire worth? Not pvp, but merely preying upon the unaware in a complex game, abusing game mechanics to victimize people within the comfort of high sec.
Why should suicide gankers get special treatment when it comes to risk vs reward? And why should these risk-averse players who are afraid of real pvp continue to be allowed to abuse newer players whose only crime is not being familiar with concord response times?
Why do you feel entitaled to be exempt from pvp in a pvp game? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12927
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 15:50:00 -
[160] - Quote
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote:
Suicide ganking isn't pvp.
Oh so the people we blow up are infact NPCs?
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: Suicide gankers do what they do because they are afraid of real pvp where they might have to risk something and where people will shoot back at them.
So how about the fact that the very kill you quoted was from a member of GSF, the people who risked several TRILLION in ships in one battle.
NoLife NoFriends StillPosting wrote: The victim-blaming mentality has become first nature to these entitled suicide gankers who will tell themselves anything to deny the obvious.
Who else is to blame for them fitting an anti-tank on a t1 hauler and stuffing 400 mil in the bay and then autopiloting while AFK? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12927
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 15:53:00 -
[161] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:PvP means Player vs. Player.
Is this just an alt of the other person who lacks understanding and is clouded by bias?
Pointless.
Its Fab Rob. He got his other alts (6 or something) banned after abusing people in the pirate rebalance thread. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12927
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 16:29:00 -
[162] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I consider it a buff because the smart pilots fitted more tank in exchange for less cargo space. The freighters became categorically worse than they were before and there is no way to bring them back to the pre-patch omni-awesome stats. And you consider this a buff?! Yeah, I think I'll stick with GÇ£oddGÇ¥. Quote:I actually don't haul, mainly because I think that CODE has affected the risk/reward of it to the point where it doesn't seem very profitable. So this is yet another thing that you have no insight into and instead try to comment on based on hearsay rather than any kind of established facts. And again more lies from you....you sure are good at making up new ones every 5 minutes. Freighters can have a lot more ehp post-patch by fitting bulkheads, which is what I would do. Less cargo space, more ehp - that is a buff in my world. And one need not haul himself to be part of the discussion vis-a-vis hauling. i'm active in the anti gank channels, I try to help gank victims escape, I discuss fitting with haulers, I carefully follow killboard to see where haulers are going down and how they are fitted, I follow gank intel to see who is ganking them, and participate in many other directly relevant activities, giving me direct experience on the matter involved. So no, you absurd claim that my information is "hearsay" is, once again, completely false.
It is impossible to fit a freighter that can get the same tank and cargo as before the nerf. You will have less of one or the other.
So yes, freighters got nerfed. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12929
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 16:39:00 -
[163] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
But you can get more total tank than before, and still have a lot of cargo capacity - which is what the freighter pilots wanted (and I fully supported). So, at least in their view, CCP significantly buffed them (and it did so because it felt that too many were getting felled by suicide gankers. Yet another example of CCP analyzing a situation and responding appropriately).
I can get one or the other. No matter how I fit it I cannot transport the same number of my goods in one trip like I used to. My freighter is worse than before because I need to make two trips rather than one. It was nerfed and you are one of the idiots that got it nerfed.. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12930
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 17:21:00 -
[164] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
That number is from your own side....please scroll back and you will see the source.
Please provide link, I cannot find what you are speaking of. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12932
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 18:21:00 -
[165] - Quote
Ok so it wasn't a link, prepare to get a lesson.
We are the corp that industrialized ganking. The gank CAT? That is our design. The tactics used for mass ganking of freighters? We came up with it. We have done a lot of homework on this subject so lets get started.
On average around a dozen freighters are killed a day, of these around half happen in high sec. You can then on average half it again to take out all of the freighters that are killed due to war decs, criminal countdowns and even the odd concord kill.
So we have a number ganker per day of around at most 6 mostly 1-3. The current estimate for active freighter trips per day is somewhere between 100,000 and 300,000.
So that is at most a 6 in 100,000 chance of you being suicide ganked statistically speaking. There is a greater chance of you being involved in a car accident than being ganked in your freighter.
Freighter ganking is infact down from last year. Why? Because Freighter pilots have learned for the most part not to stuff 10 billion in the hold like they used to. The days of netting 60-120 billion in a freighter are more or less over. Most keep their cargo down below gank worthy level and are thus, more or less safe.
Freighters are statistically one of the safest ships to be in in all of EVE. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12932
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 19:22:00 -
[166] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Actually i made reasonable points about bumping being used to impede warping off. The other side simply asserted, without evidence, that warping off remains possible, and then declared anything contrary to their view to be "lying." When challenged on this, they went straight to name calling.
It is possible to warp after being bumped. There are also several ways to stop a bump from even happening. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12933
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 19:37:00 -
[167] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Requires webbers (who the gankers are happy to shoot first),
This would spawn concord and ruin the gank.
Veers Belvar wrote: may be unable to align to the celestial, and may be unable to align to the interceptor.
The interceptor moves, move it to where the freighter can warp to it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12933
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 20:33:00 -
[168] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
I think this is also an important post, because real data would really help things here. Unfortunately I don't have the numbers, and I don't see any source for your numbers. It would help if CCP would be more open with this data. Would you be able to check if freighter ganking has inreased since CODE started their freighter gank campaign?
It hasn't. Compared to a year ago freighter ganking has halved. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12933
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 20:39:00 -
[169] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
I think this is also an important post, because real data would really help things here. Unfortunately I don't have the numbers, and I don't see any source for your numbers. It would help if CCP would be more open with this data. Would you be able to check if freighter ganking has inreased since CODE started their freighter gank campaign?
It hasn't. Compared to a year ago freighter ganking has halved. Can you source your data for me? Freighter kills have not been upward trending in the last 2 months?
Our own records. Data can be found on zkill.
Ganking freighters might be up from 2 months ago but it is still down from last year. Barge ganking when compared to 3 years ago is also dramatically lower. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12933
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 20:50:00 -
[170] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Are you able to share this data? I'm not sure if you talking about absolute numbers, relative frequency, etc.... Also, it should be easy enough for you to check of the number of freighters blown up in the last 2 month has been increasing...a lot of people here seem to doubt it.
All the raw data is on zkill, feel free to go look.
Code are destroying fewer freighters than we were at this point last year. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12933
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 20:52:00 -
[171] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Also, it should be easy enough for you to check of the number of freighters blown up in the last 2 month has been increasing...a lot of people here seem to doubt it. So why havent you? Because Goons have the hard data and I don't!
Yes, you do. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12933
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 20:59:00 -
[172] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
But I don't have your crack team of trained monkeys which collected all the data and put it into nice, easy to read spreadsheets and charts!
Doesn't stop you from doing it yourself. All of the data is open to the public. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12934
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 21:11:00 -
[173] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
But I don't have your crack team of trained monkeys which collected all the data and put it into nice, easy to read spreadsheets and charts!
Doesn't stop you from doing it yourself. All of the data is open to the public. Why not make your data public so we can all use it instead of asking me to redo hundreds of hours of work?
Same reason we don't give out our financial data to the public, its our data the we use in our own projects. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12937
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 03:39:00 -
[174] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:What I would like to see are mechanics that cause more ganking of undertanked haulers with excessive cargo, and less ganking of well tanked/empty haulers that are a net loss to the gankers. I think that would make suicide ganking a much more valuable and logical activity. Why should there be less ganking of empty or tanked haulers? Because Eve risk/reward mechanics should make that unprofitable, and hence rare.
It is unprofitable and it is rare. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12938
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 03:54:00 -
[175] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: Repeating the same assertion over and over does not make it true. Please provide a source for the freighter being able to escape bumping, or admit that you have none.
I gave you several a few pages back. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12939
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 04:09:00 -
[176] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: Repeating the same assertion over and over does not make it true. Please provide a source for the freighter being able to escape bumping, or admit that you have none.
I gave you several a few pages back. Must have missed it, can you clarify? This is without assistance from friends, etc.... This is an MMO, they are using a fleet, what makes you think you don't have to use at least one friend to counter the efforts of 25 people? Why does CONCORD come and save you if you get warp scrambled? Why don't they demand that you bring friends to help you? Because when people do bad things to you in highsec, CONCORD comes and kills them, and sets you free. Why should it matter if they pressed F5 to scram you, or used 3 machs to bump you so you can't align and warp off?
Because if concord went after people bumping each other then the jita undock would be a graveyard. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12939
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 04:14:00 -
[177] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I see a Rhea with a paltry 100 mil cargo, that cost a lot more than to gank. then an obelisk with 700 mil ganked at a loss, another one with 500 mil ganked at a loss, then one with 150 mil ganked at a loss, and one charon with 1.4 bil in cargo ganked at a profit. so 4/5 were at a loss, and many at a significant loss.
My question involved the freighter itself being able to escape, without help. You claimed empty, tanked freighters were being killed. None of those are empty, none are tanked. Why should it be able to escape a trap laid by 15 plus people without any help. This isn't a single player game. I meant empty or tanked, not both...here are some examples..... https://zkillboard.com/kill/40982597/ (basically empty) https://zkillboard.com/kill/40979249/https://zkillboard.com/kill/40978967/
They are being paid to gank freighters, that is where their money comes from. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12942
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 04:46:00 -
[178] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
"other" is not a required word in that sentence. In your view CCP Falcon should have said "CONCORD is not a police force at all. They are not in highsec to protect you. They are merely an isk-sink that destroy ships that commit a criminal act subsequent to such act occurring. Go protect yourselves." The fact that he did not say that strongly suggests that CONCORD is in fact viewed as a law enforcement agency (which is exactly what they do - enforce the laws, and punish criminals).
Stop twisting his words.
He said that concord are like police because they do not protect, they punish after the event has happened. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12944
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:06:00 -
[179] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Why are you even trying to fly a freighter under a wardec? Ever been to highsec?
Whats your point? Trying to fly a freighter under a wardec is about as moronic as it gets. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12944
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:08:00 -
[180] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
And again - just like warp scrambling is a crime, using bumping to render a ship unable to warp, which is the functional equivalent, SHOULD be a crime.
No it shouldn't.
It is laughably easy to avoid and if you do get bumped there are several very easy ways to get out of it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12944
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:16:00 -
[181] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
And again - just like warp scrambling is a crime, using bumping to render a ship unable to warp, which is the functional equivalent, SHOULD be a crime.
No it shouldn't. It is laughably easy to avoid and if you do get bumped there are several very easy ways to get out of it. Warp scrambling is also easy to avoid. Blow up the scram...get out before they lock, move out of range, have friends bump them out of range. Do we care? Do we not have CONCORD punishing for restricting mobility because its easy to avoid?
I don't care how you try to word this terrible idea of yours.
Protection of your ship is up to you, bumping is not an aggressive mechanic and is easily avoided. Concord will not protect you from your own incompetence. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12947
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:20:00 -
[182] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Except they will protect you from your incompetence in getting scrammed, right? And why is my idea terrible? Please give me your horrible scenario.
No, they wont. Concord will not stop people from pointing you.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12948
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:26:00 -
[183] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: They will come and blow up the pointers. My solution replicates that, in that they come and "release" the point, allowing you to warp off. Now what is the horrible downside to this?
Because it means CCP is protecting you rather than you protecting yourself.
Do you even know why freighters are bumped? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12948
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:30:00 -
[184] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: They will come and blow up the pointers. My solution replicates that, in that they come and "release" the point, allowing you to warp off. Now what is the horrible downside to this?
Because it means CCP is protecting you rather than you protecting yourself. Do you even know why freighters are bumped? Yes, to stop the from aligning and warping off.
Wrong.
They are still able to warp off if they use a web or warp to a celestial or safe or to a ship that is in front of them. They are bumped to get them away from the gate guns and navy ships on the gate. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12948
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 05:35:00 -
[185] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
If they could just warp off to a celestial bumping would be pretty pointless, right? No one would do it. Obviously it is done in such a way that you want have time to align and reach the threshold speed to warp to a celestial.
People are stupid Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12950
|
Posted - 2014.09.02 06:05:00 -
[186] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
If they could just warp off to a celestial bumping would be pretty pointless, right? No one would do it. Obviously it is done in such a way that you want have time to align and reach the threshold speed to warp to a celestial.
People are stupid That stupid? In 15 mins of being bumped they couldn't muster the basic competence to click on a nearby celestial and press "warp to." You really believe that? And anyhow I tried telling an Orca pilot to do it in Uedama, and he said he kept trying but the bumping made it impossible, so I don't think that is foolproof at all.
They stuff billions into untanked t1 haulrs. Yes they are that stupid. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12954
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 03:45:00 -
[187] - Quote
virgofire wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:virgofire wrote:All in all the idea of high sec ganking is fine. My only wish would be that something be done a bit about bumping. No matter how good a pilot you are, once someone starts to bump you, you are kind of toast. Very few counters to it and most involve luck.
I think that would be the part that would frustrate me the most. Try as I might, I couldnt save my ship from being pushed off the gate.
Granted I know nothing will be done about bumping, since really nothing can be done. Just my wishful thinking. I actually proposed a fix. If CONCORD spawns post gank attempt, you would get 60 seconds to warp off where you would be unaffected by bumping. This would not help you survive the initial gank attempt, but it would at least mean they would only get one shot at you. Unfortunately I just see that as being too easy. 60 seconds is along time and a bit OP. I can understand the frustration of being ganked. I am a horrible PVPer, and I hate losing ships, especially expensive ones, however that is the game. If anything would be done in my mind, it would be to fix how bumping works. Instead of a frigate completely re aligning a freighter when bumping it, the mass of the two ships should be more accurate. A freighter should have enough power in its engines to push a small frigate out of the way, and its mass should be able to compensate for moderate impacts. So a freighter should still be able to reach warp velocity even while being bumps, unless multiple ships are on it. I realize this is kind of how the current mechanics are but the collision isnt horribly accurate. Just a random though.
A frigate isn't going to do much when i slams into a freighter. People use machs, the bulkiest fast fat thing in game, to do the bumping. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 03:46:00 -
[188] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Because its being used to replicate the effect of warp scrambling.
I have already told you why freighters are bumped once in this thread and it is not to replicate a warp scram. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 03:51:00 -
[189] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
If it wasnt to replicate a warp scram they would just warp off and what would the point be?
They can just warp off as their warp drive is still fully functional. All they need is something in front of their ship to warp to. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 03:54:00 -
[190] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I still want to hear about how it's not okay to force people to PvP, but how it's just fine to try and force people to PvE.
Care to answer that, either of you two hypocrites? I think it's fine to force PvP, I support suicide ganking. I also happen to think that the police would not take kindly to career -10 sec status suicide gankers hanging out, and would force them out of the system. Hence why I think highsec should be off limits if your sec status goes too low. Grind it up and be more selective with your ganks.
The police do attack -10 pilots, that's why we need to get the freighters off the gate. The faction navy and gate guns rip apart gank ships Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 03:57:00 -
[191] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
If it wasnt to replicate a warp scram they would just warp off and what would the point be?
They can just warp off as their warp drive is still fully functional. All they need is something in front of their ship to warp to. Yes, and the Bumping is done so they CANNOT do that. The bumpers push them in a direction where there is nothing to warp to.
So have one person with you in a fast frigate to provide that warp out point. An interceptor can MWD out far enough to warp to in a matter of seconds. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 03:57:00 -
[192] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Depends on the ship, Thrashers tank better than Catas, and a Talos or Brutix with an LSE can tank them for quite a bit.
No gank ship has a tank, they all die fast on a gate. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:11:00 -
[193] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
It's too bad your arguments were just demolished. It's also easy to avoid/escape getting scrammed. And bumping people who could warp off would be..well...pointless.....
So tell me, does bumping shut down the ability to activate your MWD? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:14:00 -
[194] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Depends on the ship, Thrashers tank better than Catas, and a Talos or Brutix with an LSE can tank them for quite a bit. None of those can tank HS gate guns and faction police for anywhere near long enough to perform a gank. Stop lying. How fast with a Talos with an LSE go down? Stop lying. Each gun does 176 dps and there are 8 on a high sec gate.
Plus the navy ships, often including a navy battleship. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:14:00 -
[195] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
It's too bad your arguments were just demolished. It's also easy to avoid/escape getting scrammed. And bumping people who could warp off would be..well...pointless.....
So tell me, does bumping shut down the MWD? Does warp disrupting shut down the MWD?
Answer my question. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:41:00 -
[196] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
No, MWD still works, if he has one (freighters dont).
So a frigate has no issue with burning out in front of a freighter does it? The gankers are not going to catch it and they cannot stop a freighter from warping to it.
So, bumping already has an effective and easy to do counter to it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:46:00 -
[197] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
And there is already an effective and easy solution to warp disrupting - have your buddy ECM the guy (or even do it yourself)! CONCORD response doesnt depend on "ease" of avoidance or solution.
Warp disruptors shut down the warp drive of the target entirely, dumping does not.
That is the difference. A difference you seem to simply not understand. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:54:00 -
[198] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
solo response....
with a buddy you can solve disrupting real easy too, just ecm the guy, does not affect CONCORD response.
ECM is chance based, warping to any object in front of your ship works every time without fail.
You have nothing to argue with here. Bumping is one of the easiest tactics to evade and is not used as a form of tackle because it is so easy to evade. We only use it to get the freighter away from the gate guns and navy ships. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12957
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 04:55:00 -
[199] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Warp disruptors shut off the warp drive, making the ship unable to warp off.
bumping prevents the ship from aligning and reaching warp velocity, making the ship unable to warp off.
So the ship changes its alignment to the same direction its being bumped and can warp off. Its warp drive is not impacted at all. If there are no celestials there, then it can't.
So use a fast frigate. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12958
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 05:07:00 -
[200] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Well that's enough for tonight....just more speculation, and more dead freighters. 6 yesterday, today was quiet. Maybe they were all "bad" at avoiding bumping, but I seriously doubt that you can ALWAYS escape it, in fact done properly, I strongly suspect that you can virtually NEVER escape it.
How do you stop a freighter from warping to a frigate 200km directly in front of it when the freighter is moving at full speed without a warp disruptor or scram? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12961
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 16:47:00 -
[201] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Destroyed is the not the same as Dropped. If that much is destroyed, you can bet that a fair portion is dropped as well. You keep repeating the lie of non-profit; you keep failing to prove it, further demonstrating the fact that you have to lie to even appear as if you had an argument (which turns out to be irrelevant anyway). Not enough dropped to cover the losses. Look at CODE's P/L - close to 400 billion raised, but only 10 billion in the treasury. Where is the profit here? The thing is a massive isk loser.
If you look at the total amount of isk the CFC has made over its life and look at our current balance it would also seem like we are operating at a loss.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12961
|
Posted - 2014.09.03 17:15:00 -
[202] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Destroyed is the not the same as Dropped. If that much is destroyed, you can bet that a fair portion is dropped as well. You keep repeating the lie of non-profit; you keep failing to prove it, further demonstrating the fact that you have to lie to even appear as if you had an argument (which turns out to be irrelevant anyway). Not enough dropped to cover the losses. Look at CODE's P/L - close to 400 billion raised, but only 10 billion in the treasury. Where is the profit here? The thing is a massive isk loser. If you look at the total amount of isk the CFC has made over its life and look at our current balance it would also seem like we are operating at a loss. CFC has used the money to obtain other assets, specifically control over large parts of nullsec. The expected future income stream eclipses the isk expended to obtain it. Now, the only viable business plan I see for CODE, since their suicide ganking operating will never turn a profit, is to gank enough miners to materially increase the prices of raw materials, due to decreased mining in highsec. Potentially this could benefit their investors from the nullsec power blocks, who hold most of the materials (incidentally I think that mass mining is devaluing all EVE materials and inflating Plex prices, and could use a major nerf. The problem I see with this is that 400 billion isk later they have failed to achieve their objective, and now the focus on other groups - freighters, incursions, etc... makes it even less likely that they can materially reduce the amount of mining in eve.
How do you know they are not turning a profit? Equally, how did you conclude that this is their goal? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
|
|