Probably the most ludicrous comment I have read so far !
What part of engaging in actions that you know are going to provoke Concord isn’t ‘fighting Concord’ ? The response of Concord is factored into the action right from the start, right down to what ships to use, what ammo to use, how many ships to use, and so on. The actual response time of Concord, dependant on the region security level, is factored in too. Concord are an integral part of the entire plan…not just some road sweepers who turn up after the event. For suicide gankers, Concord ARE the event ! That…amazingly…is why it is called suicide ganking !
Sigh. No, CONCORD is not the event. You do know PvE stands for Player vs Enviroment right? Gankers aren’t fighting CONCORD. They are fighting the player. Whether or not the player fights back is on that player. CONCORD is the consequence of ganking in high sec, not the goal.
Mamas, you uh aren’t so swift on the uptake huh?
You can be against ganking all you want. But facts is facts. High sec ganking is PvP, CCP supported, end of story.
If gankers are not fighting Concord at all…then WHY do gankers have to choose low cost ships, weapons, fit, etc that ALL take into account the fighting power and response time of Concord ?
Again and again you try to make out as if Concord are simply road sweepers cleaning up ‘after’ the event. But no…the fact that Concord are taken into account in the planning of the event itself…THAT in itself makes Concord PART of the whole thing from the outset.
Any force whose power and response time has to be factored in from the start cannot be anything other than a force whose influence you are fighting from the start, even if you are not directly firing weapons at them when you undock. So yes, the fight IS with Concord…as it is they who fully determined your ship, your fit, your ammo, your lack of shielding, the fact that you bring along half a dozen others, etc, etc…right from the start ! What part of this isn’t Player Versus Environment ???
I’m not against ganking…I’m against the ridiculous myths that have grown up around it. In particular the entire panoply of ‘lazy’, ‘AFK’, ‘stupid’, etc labels for miners, the ludicrous notion that gankers are somehow ‘helping’ miners, and the idea that if a miner gets ganked it is somehow ‘their fault’. All of those silly generalisations are easily refutable.
Context: you were saying that you couldn’t retract your drones and send out new drones in time. I gave you a solution that works in any such scenario (abandon faraway drones, immediately launch new drones) but I did not say a Procurer can fight a group of gankers solo and win.
Sigh. They are not fighting CONCORD. The reason they fit that way is to lose as less as possible to repeat it for lulz or to maximize profit.
If there was no CONCORD, people wouldn’t be ganking in catas, they’d fit differently for actual fights.
CONCORD is the consequence, not the target. No matter how badly you want to make it PvE, it simply isn’t.
In fact I’d say as ganking is evolving, you are seeing other ship selections besides catas. You see thrashers/ruppies/vexors even some trig ships to take down specialized targets.
Again, you’d know this if you actually yennoe played or kept up to date with ganking.
Most people who fall prey to ganks are exactly that. They are helping miners. Helping them learn how to play the game the way it should be played. Some days you may evade, some days you get caught.
Read the thread, quoted you…who is embarrassed? You are so busy minding everyone else’s thoughts you ran off into the weeds. Let’s read that quote again shall we…
This is the most muddled, erroneous sentence on game mechanics I have ever read. Go ahead submit it to CCP for new player training.
Pro tip from Gix for noobs: PVE is CONCORD because miners don’t buy combat ships. Maybe you could follow up with the PvE fits for CONCORD missions and ISK/Hour goals.
I think even the noobs will laugh.
Words have meanings and you are guilty of malpractice. Take a rest from the forum and go play the game for a bit. The forum will be just fine with out you - and a lot shorter.
Sigh. Re-read the thread again. Cybillawhateverhernameis is making the case that ganking is PvE due to CONCORD. I have clarified my position several times.
CONCORD isn’t PvE, its a consequence. Miners don’t buy combat ships? Huh. Guess you can only be one thing in a sandbox game huh?
Although a battle proc/skiff can put some serious hurt on unsuspecting peoples.
Also in the quote itself, it clarifies my position. You are embarrassing
Its ok mate, I play 5-6 hours a day. You want to make me stop? Come find me Let the antimatter talk.
You know this is a pretend world, right? You are a client in a computer simulation. So am I. And you are trying to get the last world with a computer simulation. If it makes you feel better, you can have the last word (as you have insisted with all the computer clients). I suppose you get the last word when barking at the moon too.
I’m in-game about 8 hours each weekday. I trade stock and index options with the occasional futures thrown in. Good trading is very boring and repetitious. Playing Eve assuages my boredom and by extension I suppose that includes you.
But you are effectively agreeing with my point ! The whole reason gankers have the fits they do is BECAUSE of Concord. You keep trying to make Concord some post hoc ‘consequence’…some minor little inconvenience…just road sweepers turning up after the crash. But Concord DECIDE the entire fit and strategy in advance. How can NPCs that have that much influence not be a factor in the entire endeavour ?
What is more…I have seen miners ( quite cleverly, actually…they are not as ‘stupid’ as you say ) employ the ganker trick of re-directing Concord…in this case to hang about and defend them. I guess the loss of a single Venture in the asteroid belts is peanuts to the big mining corps. In no way can it STILL be PvP when people are calling up NPCs in advance to defend them !
In fact the entire issue of Condord being re-directed is yet another aspect you just ignore.
You said “Then you can immediately launch the combat drones to fight off the attackers”
As I originally said…what would be the POINT of launching drones if you could not win ? You implied that a miner COULD ‘fight off’ gankers. What ? Fight off half a dozen heavily armed Catalysts all in the space of 10 seconds using just drones ? This I gotta see ! No doubt you have loads of video examples.
I think this captures the essence of what your problem is with EVE:
What is the point of fighting if you cannot win?
For one, it may be fun to go down fighting. You may want to kill one of them before you get killed. You may have friends nearby that decloak and help you fight back (a trap, who would have thought!). You may just want to know how to do this because it might help you next time you’re attacked in a Vexor in null sec and your drones are too far out to fight back, but this guy on the forum gave you a neat trick on how to immediately launch new drones.
Lots of possiblities. You pick.
(But just so you know, the wrong choice is where you assume I said that Procurers can fight off multiple gankers solo and win, just because I explained how you can abandon drones to respond more quickly.)
Lol…no…that’s all just part of the twisting of words that is the bulk of this thread. My original point was that you were raising impossible ‘winning’ scenarios. What does it even matter if you can launch drones a few seconds earlier. Five Hobgoblin II are not gonna defeat half a dozen Catalysts in time anyway…so it is irrelevant. The irrelevancy was ( if you read back in the posts ) my original objection to all the ‘fighting back’ stuff.
Cloaked friends is yet another dubious proposition. As if mining isn’t boring enough as it is…who’s gonna want to hang about for hours and watch…nothing ?
I have better tactics, like always moving my mining ship above the asteroid belt…so asteroids cant get in the way. I never name my ship ’ Cilla Cybin Procurer’, as that’s just asking to be taken out by anyone who wants a personal gank. I have my ship at 65K EHP…gonna be hard for any solo ganker to take me out ( it can go as high as 80K EHP…but the extra cost is just not worth it ). And I have two alternate routes to where I mine…in case gankers decide to hang about at stargates. Plus…best of all…I know a 0.5 security system where at certain times of day I’m the only one there !
And to cap it all off…now I’m an Eve billionaire and have all my various ship fits saved, gankers can eat my exhaust as ‘I’ll be back’…to quote Arnie.
And that brings me right back to my very original point…that ganking is far more of a concern for noobs who simply don’t have that level of ISK.
The asymmetric nature of ganking is one reason I do not regard it as ‘proper’ PvP. Gix can argue all he likes that there’s a ‘player’ at both ends, but what goes on is not a ‘fight’ in any traditional sense of the word. Indeed…many of the vessels attacked CANNOT fight back in any meaningful sense.
Some argue that armour/shielding is the ‘fighting back’…and one gets the endless myth that 'if only XYZ had enough shielding… '. But shielding does not make you ungankable…it just raises ( and not by a massive amount either ) the number of ships required to gank. And clearly there is a limit to shielding and gankers know that.
Of course there are situations in ‘proper’ PvP where one ship heavily outweighs another and slaughter takes place. But in that situation the loser COULD always have turned up in a better ship, or at least a matching one. Where ganking is absurdly asymmetrical and ’ not cricket’ ( as we’d say in the UK ) is the degree to which even the best armoured and shielded barges, etc, have zero real defence against a team of gankers that are not even maxed out in terms of strength.
It is not an even fight…and to me that ability for a fight to be even is the very basis of proper PvP.
