Nonsense. The mechanics favor the hauler. The stupidity of hauler pilots favors the ganker. It is very easy to make it impossible to profitably gank your ship, reducing the threat you face to the gankers who are willing to throw away ISK to kill you out of spite. The only reason it’s easy to make a bunch of ISK ganking is that too many idiots fly overpriced loot crates into known ganking systems and hand over easy wins. If people stopped doing that ganking would be far less common.
Then you follow them to the alternate. But you don’t want to invest that much effort (and for good reason).
And the same principle applies to all ships. It is trivially easy to make your ship impossible to profitably gank, no matter what you fly.
Secondly the only mechanics a hauler has are passive.
Only if they’re solo. And why does it matter so much if they’re passive vs. active? A passive mechanic that makes you 100% impossible to profitably gank is still protection.
It’s not that easy at all since you can profitably gank freighters with relatively low value cargo.
Nonsense. The minimum cost to gank a freighter is known, if your expected loot drop is below that value you can’t be ganked with an expectation of profit and if your total cargo is below that value you can’t be ganked profitably under any circumstances. What you mean is that it isn’t easy to be impossible to profitably gank while still carrying all the loot you want to carry.
It’s no good following gankers, they almost always will arrive quicker than AGs can.
Why have the gankers identified a target before the anti-gankers? Are you not as good at scouting?
Do you even bother reading what you’re disagreeing with? It is indisputable fact that you can make any ship impossible to profitably gank. For example, a ship fitted with nothing but T1 basic modules will not drop enough loot to cover the cost of the gank ships.
Because active mechanics are fun to engage with while passive mechanics are boring.
Fine. Then to maintain overall balance we’ll have to reduce the cost of ganking so that it is far more difficult to use the passive mechanic. You don’t get to keep the passive mechanic AND get new active mechanics on top of it.
It can easily be done for 200m, that means with a drop rate of 50% anything over 400m in cargo is profitable and that’s ignoring the fact that loot will also drop from the gankers and that a high ballpark figure.
Well there you go, you figured it out: keep loot value below 400m and you can’t be profitably ganked. That wasn’t so hard, was it?
Gankers can have multiple targets and drop the whole fleet on one of them.
So why don’t you identify all of those targets, keep a scout watching the gank fleet, and initiate warp as soon as you see the gank fleet enter warp?
(Answer: because it’s hard, and nobody cares enough about protecting the idiots who get ganked.)
Look, we can go down this route yet again if you want but you will never change my mind. You favour easy no skill PvP with zero effort and zero risk. You want a PvP arena of a game. You’ve made this clear. I’ve been on both sides of ganking and can unequivocally say that ganking is vastly overpowered. Get over it.
IOW, “I KNOW EVERYTHING I AM GOD OF EVE YOU WILL NEVER BE RIGHT LOLOLOL I WIN WITH MY AMAAZING STRAW MAN”.
Thanks for admitting you are only here to masturbate over how clever you think you are, not to have a constructive discussion.
Well you’ve certainly left the land of reasonable scenarios…
That’s not true though.
Of course it is. Take away the stupid people and you can’t make ISK with ganking, you can only farm killboard stats.
If there were a PvE mechanics that tooks as little investments as gankign for the same relative gains you’d be throwing a world class tantrum about it.
You mean like 99% of EVE’s PvE? Completely risk-free, completely mindless, and guaranteed profit? At least ganking depends on being able to farm the right target, with PvE all you have to do is turn on your bot and walk away.
Feel free to start up an antiganking group and show us how it’s done.
Why would I invest my precious time and effort into protecting idiots I have nothing but contempt for?
No, you concluded that while having a tea party discussion with all of your other forum personalities. The people you’re arguing with most certainly have not.
Yes, because “fit cheap ships that don’t drop much loot” and “somehow coordinate 1000 players and hope the server doesn’t crash trying to handle it” are definitely equivalent…
But you know that can’t happen, because your definition of “stupid people” includes new players.
New players don’t have enough ISK to be worth ganking for profit. And you’ve already rejected my proposal to give genuine newbies (IOW, not alts of veterans) 100% immunity to PvP, clearly demonstrating that your supposed concern for newbies is just a pretense of legitimacy over your desire to protect veteran farmers.
Nowhere near as risk-free and mindless and ganking and nowhere near the same level of income.
Lolwut? Virtually all of EVE’s PvE is the textbook definition of zero risk. The only meaningful chance of ship loss is if your ISP drops your connection before you can turn on your tank. At least with ganking you have to correctly identify targets, deal with anti-gankers (weak as they may be), and suffer guaranteed ship losses every time you pull the trigger.
And, as mentioned already, ganking only provides income because of stupid people. Take away the stupid people and it’s a net loss of ISK.
Why would you invest your precious time and effort being abusive to people on forums?
I don’t. I’ve been immensely more kind and charitable towards you than you actually deserve.
Is this a hypothetical number for conversation purposes only? If not, what would be the equivalent threshold to stay below in order to keep a pve ship from being profitable to gank?
Depends on a few factors: whether the gank is taking place near a station/gate or in other space, and whether it’s being done by CODE. or a purely for-profit ganking group.
Where sentry guns are present, you can’t really use destroyers (outside of Thrashers for small targets like frigates, pods, and untanked T1 haulers). If you’re flying an untanked T1 hauler, you might get ganked near a gate if you’re carrying less than 100 million ISK, but not necessarily, as the gankers might not want to waste shooters due to opportunity cost. For thick targets, you have to use Taloses/Tornados, and that’s 80-100 million ISK per ship, so the target has to carry twice that much per X amount of EHP that each ship might cause in damage. If, let’s say, a Talos is expected to deal 20,000 damage, then a ship with 100,000 EHP would need to carry enough to offset 5 shooters valued at 100 million each, so a billion ISK in the cargo, assuming a 50% drop rate. But the shooters might not be inclined to go after a target if they merely expect to break even.
The numbers are rough, of course.
For ganks in space, the calculus changes, because now you can use massed destroyers to do it, since the sentries won’t tear you up. It’s not recommended to use anything more than slight bling as a mission runner in high-sec.
Generally speaking, I would say that if your value is more than 100 million ISK per 10,000 EHP, you’re pushing into “bling” territory. If you’re flying in a faction BS and have a faction module or two, you likely won’t be a target to anyone except CODE., if they’re operating in your area. If you’re packing close to a billion ISK in faction stuff, then you start risking a gank from a for-profit group.
Thanks again for the info everyone. The last time I remember getting popped was in a t2 fit drake. I’d cleared out a sleeper site and was salvaging. I alt tabbed to switch Netflix and came back a minute later webbed and scammed. This was in 2011 or so, I doubt if the economics are still the same.
These days my most expensive ships are a raven and the soe cruiser.