High Sec Candidate

Council Of Stellar Management CSM Campaigns
426

Because it is very hard to take one type of ganking and make changes that fit only there, it is not so very worth it trying to separate them. Ganking is ganking.

Erm… you are assuming that every single hauler that flies is automatically considered by gankers as a target. I, on the other hand, assume that not all haulers are considered by gankers as targets.

No. Not at all. Also because I assume that not every hauler in space is considered or checked by gankers to see if it is a viable target.

All that is still… like a lot of what you have been saying… irrelevant to what I have been saying for the last few years. Simply irrelevant.

427

You are ignoring the part of that, when it started in the thread, where I talked about my personal experience.

I would be interested to hear how many ganks you have failed, and why.

428

You seemed to be going at concrete numbers and random numbers when you were talking about me wanting an exactly 50% chance of surviving when gankers are on grid with me. Why would I not want you to provide concrete numbers when you talk about “WAY” higher than 50% ??

This seems also to be just an opinion.

429

That’s what ship balance through bonuses and modules can do.

Ship stats and fits are what give us so much variability in the game.

As far as a ship goes, they are all just entries in a database, but it’s the difference in the values in the fields that actually create the different classes and behaviours. The graphics then create the visual clues and immersion for us, but it’s the stats of the ships and modules themselves that create different possibilities.

If you want to affect just one type of ganking, then look at the balance around the relevant class of ships and you very much can target specific aspects.

430

The problem being, changing the stats on a mining barge will not just affect people trying to gank it in high sec.

431

=“Lorelei_Ierendi, post:430, topic:159244”]
The problem being, changing the stats on a mining barge will not just affect people trying to gank it in high sec.
[/quote]
That’s where module balance comes in.

  • Cyno’s can’t be lit in highsec (not effect on players that want to use them in low or null)
  • Bombs can’t be launched in highsec or lowsec (no effect on nullsec or wormholes)
  • Jumpdrives can’t be used in wormholes (no effect on highsec, lowsec or nullsec)
  • Jump portals can’t be activated by BLOPs ships in wormholes
  • Safety setting have 0 impact on play in nullsec or wormhole space

There’s still plenty of ways that CCP have found to be able to balance around individual ships and playstyles in different parts of space.

432

Of course.
But that does not, for example with mining barges, really apply with:

does it.
Or how would you envisage that affecting the high sec miner? Are there things that one can do with the ships to affect that?

433

When the scout is acting as a warp’in point, it needs to get as close as possible to the target preferable while remaining cloaked. I think that was just over 2km? Then you “warp to zero” the fleet.

The ONLY active threat a ganker has during this process is if a white knight is stilling on the gate/station with a fast-lock scram ship but that is a very rare occurrence.

o7

434

What? What I’m saying is you may use any type of ganking as an example to see that the chance of surviving a gank is WAY higher than 50% already… How is it not worth analysing each of those cases one by one if you’re asking for numbers?

What isn’t worth doing is the type of “test” you did to “prove” the chance of a gank to succeed is 100%…

You really don’t get it, do you? Wherever it is that you’re trying to place the goal posts, picking a ship that the gankers won’t even try to gank is one of the things that pilots can do to “survive”, because YOU have moved the point where the gank starts away from the shooting and towards the point where the ganker decides what constitutes a viable target, remember?

What? Checked (i.e. scanned) not, because that would happen at the next step, but of course they consider every hauler as a potential target. Why would they not? What happens here is that some of those haulers “survive” the gank at the point where the ganker decides what constitutes a viable target, instead of at the point of shooting, but that’s where YOU seem to be moving the point at which the gank starts, remember?

On the contrary. That’s exactly the point. That you ask for numbers, but then refuse to estimate such numbers in any way that would be consistent with wherever it is that you consider the ganking process starts, and instead make claims based on a “personal experience” that, interestingly enough, only makes sense if you consider the gank begins when the gankers land and start shooting…

Absolutely none. I’ve never, ever, even tried to suicide gank anything.

Please show one place, just one, where I said anything about concrete numbers or you wanting exactly 50% survival rate…

Exactly, why would you when the “WAY higher than” I used is as imprecise as the “at least” that you did?

Of course. It’s not that you don’t get it. It’s that it’s irrelevant. Just like you also think this:

Because of course there is no explanation why all of this happened that could be remotely related to anything you did wrong…

1 Like
435

That is simply not correct. It does not need to.

A scout can sit in space 30km from the target… position itself so that the target is directly between it and the gate (or station or citadel) where the gankers are coming from. Then the fleet warps to the scout at “30” and… if done correctly it is exactly as if the scout was nearby, and warp at 0.

The problem is, for example, when the scout is also the looter… because then they have to fly to the wrecks. With MTUs or multiple miners, this can be a problem.

The cloak deactivates within 2000m of an object.

There are also “white knights” that use ECM. Even with the changes to the engagement rules, the EWAR ship is too far away for the ganker to do anything about it. Actually there are whole websites about what people can do to disrupt ganks. ECM is the easiest (afaik) but all the faction related EWAR can be used…

One of my favorites is when people are in the belts with high-alpha ships and shoot the catalyst to death before CONCORD appear on the killmail.

436

Haven’t seen anyone doing a test to prove anything differently…

Oh I do. You unfortunately just started about 2/3rds into a discussion and went your own way.
More power to you! Ain’t nobody judging you! Live like you wanna live!

I didnt move the point. I started there several years ago. But … whatever.

But in order to “consider” a target they have to actively be logged in and notice that a target is there.
Are there gankers online in all systems at all gates 24/7?

Actually you are wrong. I simply ganked the first targets I found. I also did not scan them first.
I used DSCAN to find the target in a belt… identified the belt and flew at it.
From the point I saw the target on DSCAN, and went for it… I narrowed down the belt and flew in.
Target destroyed. Every time.

Ah ok! Then we naturally bow to your expertise in the subject of suicide ganking, searching out targets and so on. Because instead of theory crafting, or theory whatever… you are talking from hard experience of how things really work! I mean it is not like there is ever a difference between theory and practice…

Because you talked a lot about numbers. By getting vague you simply validate my stance and make many of your posts… more irrelevant than they already are. You could delete them if you want.

Well… on the subject of ganking… we don’t really need to pay that much attention to anyone that has never actually (even once) ganked anything. Of course you have read about it…

Just like driving a car or riding a bike… reading about it is all you need to be able to do it! (that was sarcasm btw).

437

Going to need to go to bed soon… just as a warning to the people that the forums are showing as replying to me.

438

The time it would take to slowboat (cloaked) around to get perfectly in position is kinda pointless. Especially when every meter counts for a Cat, you need to land literally on top of the target and not (woops) 3-4 km away. Close enough is not an option. Plus there is the looting as you mentioned.

Your method is totally valid and elegant BUT impractical for ganking.

Normally a ganking fleet cannot lose any ships to a scraming white knight as the loss to DPS would nullify the gank. The real question is; which is easier, to protect the flock or to hunt the wolves?

439

For the scout? There are enough cloak-able ships that can fly quite fast whilst cloaked. I guess it depends how you do it, but I know enough gankers that do it the way that I mention.

The “warp at 30” method is exactly as reliable as sitting 2001m away from a target and warping at 0. If you do it properly.

Ok.

I have been actively trying to talk to gankers for several years, most attempts end up like this thread.
But of the ones I have talked to, the majority have done it the way I describe.

Yeah that is why ECM is good and easy.

That is one of the problems with regard to player activity. There is nothing engaging about mining. There is nothing engaging about sitting around and waiting for a ganker to appear. At least in null sec the rats are threatening enough to keep people on their toes… (did I mention I got hotdropped by an NPC Dreadnaught once…?)

Edit: and it is very hard to hunt people that can only be in space for a limited amount of time before the police destroy them.

440

Yeah I am staying awake because there is something a bit like real talking going on…
If I suddenly disappear and don’t come back until tomorrow… then I have collapsed into bed.

441

There’s no need to test. Killmails already provided real data (which is better than testing) to show that the success isn’t 100% even when it gets to the point of shooting, not even considering the selection of targets, which you can’t test failure on in any realistic way.

If you look at this screen capture for example from today:

failedganks
failedganks995×397 188 KB

At:

  • 22:41 successful gank against a Procurer
  • 22:52 he pulled CONCORD then waited out the criminal timer
  • 23:19 killed by CONCORD and failed a gank
  • 23:22 pulled CONCORD again
  • 23:51 successful gank

That’s just a quick look. If you analyse even just the zkill feed, you’ll see that there are a lot of ganks that fail, even just at the point of shooting.

It cannot be 100% death for targets, just on the basis of experiencing 3 successful ganks yourself. Lots fail and there is a lot of data you could look at to validate that.

1 Like
442

…not to mention the geometry sometimes. That could be a long distance to go to line everything up perfectly when all you need to do is get to the <3>2km range…speed is an issue.

For range yes but you also could be off laterally too if you are not perfectly line-up…and again, absolutely nothing is actually gained by this process and rather time is lost (and possibly loot). Oh and it’s not CODE’s SOP so…there is a reason for that.

…ok then but absolutely nothing is gained. There is no added benefit (or benefit period I can see) for using this method.

Actually it’s that very point that makes them vulnerable. You know where they are and that after a gank, they probably aren’t going anywhere ones rearmed. They have a very limited number of gankes a day so they will be anxiousness to leave the station once the timers are done…ALL the advantages on with the white knight…all they need is a fast lock ship and patients…

443

There is always a need to test.

This is not strictly relevant, because many gankers, especially those espousing some kind of ideology (instead of only being in it for profit), push the envelope of rational experience, take risks and fly at targets that they “might” get. There alone the random numbers involved in warping in can make a difference.

But that is the gankers choice. Mostly an informed choice (or a “lol there is a target, let’s try it” choice). Gankers also gank triple bulkheaded empty freighters in Uedama.

There are of course many flaws with many arguments in many directions. Hair-splitting and nit-picking does not bring (on either my side or yours) anyone further.

Why did he fail the gank? Because of something the target did? Or because he thought he could solo a Mackinaw that was orbitting an asteroid at 500 m/s?
Did he really believe he could succeed?

The why is important.

Which is why I am interested in - even anecdotal evidence - from people that have tried it.
Some gankers are also not API registered on zkill… or whatever the new thing is. They upload kills and losses manually.

1 Like
444

Please link the SOP.

445