You sound like you’re wearing a fedora.
I don’t know if you’re addressing me or not, but you should know a few things…
-
I’m not AG, and one of the other tanks I use on my hauling alt is the permit tank.
-
Jonah made my other point for me. I’m not an idiot. I don’t just use an exceptional fit and techniques that will be incredibly hard to catch in both high and low, but I also use alternating routes to and from Jita and Amarr, using one or the other depending on activity and traffic along the routes I use. Since I live about equidistant between both hubs, either is as convenient to me as the other.
-
I post with my main. If you look at zkill, you’ll see clearly that I do, indeed, undock, even if it’s only to lose a ****fit old Jaguar in a 4/10 DED
Gankers should have to be made to pay for a ganking permit much like a war dec. A ganking permit would simply reduce the amount of time between ganks.
Why should gankers have to pay for a ‘ganking permit’ if we already have wardecs?
1 Like
Because miner logic>CCP
I’ve played this game since 2004. I have a pirate main and this is my trader alt.
On my trader, I have never once been ganked in high-sec in all my time in EVE either on my pirate main or this trader alt. I am constantly moving hundreds of millions between high-sec and low-sec in my indy ships. I also do the same between high-sec for my trading. I use mostly industrial ships, cloaks and often times, just use my slow ass freighter.
I’ve lost my haulers in space, but only in low-sec gate camps where I myself made the mistake. I deserved to get popped because it was me who got slack. Where I survive ganks in low-sec is because Im correctly tanked, have speed, and a plan to get out.
CCP should not reward you for being lazy and a bad player.
2 Likes
CPP does not reward us, we’re reward cpp with our money money for no service and then still fools attacking us … not any more, I will not give my mone to be on 10/10 alert while playing a GAME …
Then, by all means, go find a single player mode game like Elite: Dangerous where you can play in perfect safety…
1 Like
word of the year is including, not excluding 
Since you are wanting to be so “inclusive”, then there’s room for everyone, “including” gankers 
1 Like
ofc, they are more than welcome, to gank each others 
1 Like
CCP are a service provider, like many other service providers they can’t guarantee that the service is available 23.5/7
and then still fools attacking us
It’s a PvP game, just as in all the other PvP games people will attack you.
not any more, I will not give my mone to be on 10/10 alert while playing a GAME
Good riddance to bad rubbish; can I have your stuff?
2 Likes
I’ll keep it, have a feeling that soon Eve will chage a loooooot 
I have a feeling you’re going to be sorely disappointed.
We’ve been having this conversation since 2003, that’s 15 years…
Hisec still has PvP in many forms, including ganking.
2 Likes
Well as my ganking experience goes.
I have had people shoot my iteron when I had it over what it should of been full. Pretty worth killing.
I have had someone shoot my iteron when it was completely empty (not one item), and I sold them back the resulting kill right for around 50mil.
I have had some group of people shoot my HAC when I was afk piloting, but the funny thing is they didn’t even break its shield, wow they were bad.
And of course the most obvious and most prevelant ship ganked was a retriever I was using somewhere in hisec. You know the horrible lore type ship that for some reason has a paper thin haul because CCP is a little overally compliant about it.
The problem with ganking and yes there is a problem is one you can be -10 and go anywhere without the police doing anything. Please relate that too real life to include your laughter. And two the paper thin hauls intentionally given to miners.
Also as haulers go CCP has made the cloaky transport hauler class so expensive that ganking them is like an automatic free green killboard. Yea that’s hard EvE right?
Now I would like to take all the worst people we can find down in the prison system and drop them in Iceland and say hey CCP remember you don’t do anything to them until they do something wrong. Something tells me Iceland would disagree.
1 Like
Nope, -10 get chased and shot at by the Faction Police.
Concord are not the old bill, they’re state executioners.
You mean the nerfed down lame want to be police but are as or worse than the want to be faction npcs? Yea sure I am sure when you think police when you want them in real life that instead you meant Fed Ex.
1 Like
Concord don’t respond to security status for a reason, low security status can be gained via legitimate means, FW for example. If Concord responded to sec status the way that the facpo do then it effectively locks a very large number of players out of hisec without just cause.
IIRC the sec status criteria that triggers a facpo response is pretty close to the criteria that makes a player freely engaged because of their sec status.
Turns out it’s not so close, -2 and facpo will respond in a 1.0.
Now if we want police like we have in real life how do you feel about response times of ranging from hours to never? Police corruption? Politically influenced police? etc, etc.
I got too the “without just cause” part before I started laughing.
These are future police, something tells me the response time has improved.
even you quitting wouldn’t mean a thing (lol)
stop thinking so highly of yourself 
1 Like