Exactly. They should have to think a bit before deciding to ruin someone’s day.
I don’t see where CCP needs to step in on this. Breaking the ‘law’ of high sec has a cost (ship loss and security status penalty) and a risk (will target destruction occur before CONCORD arrives). Planning on the part of the ganker and the potential targets modifies the risk; the ganker’s ship configurations and group size controls the cost. Gankers willing to absorb a higher cost can offset risk, much as a mission runner blinging a mission ship can increase efficiency (in the gankers’ case: spend more gank ships/more expensive fittings on the ships to increase destruction chance before CONCORD kills the gankers). The more a target has tanked their ship, the more cost or risk the gankers have to absorb - and if the rewards for the tankier target aren’t worth the increased cost or risk, then most gankers will pass on it. Will some still blow anyone up for giggles? Yes, but they will have to make money somewhere to support that effort if they are losing it all day on ganking targets with no ISK value.
They do. They have to think about whether the cost of killing you is worth it, and in many cases the answer to that question is “no”. The question is why you don’t feel the need to use the available tools to prevent your day from being ruined, and think that you’re entitled to have even more deterrent just because you don’t like getting ganked.
1 Like
The complaints of childish gankers who make the mistake of targeting ships based on inflated values of newly introduced items prove this is a fallacy. Entitled gank kids are already hitting the shoot button before any cargo scan resolves.
Your the number one support of more risk, why all of a sudden the change of heart on more risk for all players?
CCP wants to increase risk for the players, why not all players. Why should the gankers not face more risk than they already do? If miners and ratters are force to play with more risk than so should the ganker, theif, spy. You not taking a risk when you plan on a loss. Your ship is your ammo and sometimes ammo will miss. So you take the same risk that everyone else takes as soon as they activate a gun.
1 Like
Can a suicide gank succeed in 1.0 sec? If it cannot then I guess everything is fine. System sec status is not the best explained thing in the world, but it is clear that with each incremental drop that risk increases right? High sec is just a blanket term for a range and even in high sec there is meant to be risk, thus the range from 1.0 to 0.5. Correct me if I am wrong but if you want zero risk of gank you just stay in 1.0 sec space.
But you know, even if I am wrong about ganks being possible probably the only thing gankable is going to be a corvette or capsule and you will get a free one when you wake up in your new free clone anyway. The only thing you suffered was a bit of psychological pain. Buck up princess. Jump in your free ship and zip around 1.0 like you just don’t care, cause you shouldn’t.
Where did I change on risk? Let me quote myself:
And, as you say, it is absurd for this to be a thing that has no risk when everything else in EVE has risk. Rather than certain destruction suicide ganking needs to have a risk of destruction. Say, a 20% chance of CONCORD every time you commit an illegal act of aggression instead of 100%. This will make ganking a risk vs. reward thing where you have to decide if the value of the loot you’re getting is enough to justify risking your gank ships, and maybe push your luck and hope you don’t become the 20%.
I 100% agree with the idea that suicide ganking should involve risk.
Cool, problem solved. Every sensible miner/hauler/etc plans on a loss so there is no risk for them.
Yes. but CONCORD response time is shortest in 1.0 systems and so ganking is far more expensive and far less common.
1 Like
If you can’t figure out who is a spy, you deserve whatever happens to you. If you know what you’re looking for, its pretty easy to ferret out spies. Also, this wouldn’t work anyways. Seriously, if someone is good enough to be a successful spy in Eve, they are probably smart enough to get a dynamic IP or other ways to hide their IP.
Let me give you another reason to say no to this. My wife and I play Eve. We used to rent a room to another guy who started playing Eve after hearing us talk about it… other than getting a recruit-a-friend from me, we were completely uninvolved with him playing Eve. Why should what he does affect my game-play? Because so many people are too stupid to follow all of the advice that’s been given about avoiding gankers. I’d give it all again, but I’m tired of typing it out to people who literally have no desire to actually learn how to avoid being ganked and expect CCP to come hold their hands.
If you want that sort of hand-holding, go play another game. Not every game is meant to be played by everyone… I’m not a fan of realistic FPS games, but you don’t see me on Call of Duty forums demanding they make their games like Anthem, Destiny, the Division, etc.
And what happens if the gankers have better standing with the NPC corp than you do? Maybe the NPC corp should value the gankers more than they value you and help them kill you…
Seriously quit asking for hand-holding. I, personally, know I’ve posted multiple time how to avoid getting ganked. And I know it works for mining because I mine on my alpha account when I don’t feel like being on my main account. And do you want to know how many times I’ve been ganked? Zero. Why? Because I know how to avoid it. Hull up.
1 Like
You know… I’m feeling gracious today. Let me give you some advice to avoid ganking.
- Set CODE. and any other ganking group you know of to orange or red standing. This way if they are in system, you can see it in local.
- Do not mine within 5 jumps of Jita or 10 jumps of any other trading hub.
- After entering a system: click on one name in local and push control+a, this will highlight everyone currently in system. If lots of people come into system, you’ll notice them because they are not highlighted.
- Do not mine within 5 jumps of Jita… I’m serious.
- Watch D-scan, if a bunch of catalysts or thorax show up on D-scan, warp out. Seriously, its not hard to see them coming.
- What did I say about mining that close to Jita?
- Fit some damn tank on your ship… seriously
- I’m serious about staying away from trading hubs…
- Insta-dock and undock bookmarks at trading hubs are your friends.
- One more reminder: do not mine within 5 jumps of Jita or 10 jumps of any other trading hub.
So, let’s talk about fitting your mining barges and exhumers for the ability to insta-warp. Oh, you don’t think its possible. Let me introduce you to the Medium Higgs Anchor I rig. This awesome rig makes your mining barge and exhumer basically ungankable with a little preparation.
- Fit one of these to your ship.
- Using another ship make a safe (or two) in the system.
- Using that ship, bookmark a few asteroids you want to mine.
- Now, get into your higgs rig equipped ship
- Warp to 0 on one of the asteroids you want to mine.
- Begin mining
- Align towards one of your safes
- As soon as any ship appears on grid you have concerns about: WARP!
Because of the Higgs rig, your ship will be moving so slowly that you should be able to mine out the asteroid before you move out of range if you have decent mining skills.
Next, because you are at 100% speed and already aligned, you will insta-warp towards your safe as soon as you put in the command to warp.
YOU’RE WELCOME!!
1 Like
The Irony to Me is this.
The Triglavians take no prisoners. Why can’t Concord and Empire Fleets do the same? It would make a more meaningful impression and force the gankers to give space. No more setting up cloning respawn fleets nearby.
Why not make sure that Empire stations begin to remove options to capsulers if they drop below a status? Just like in the Trig Space at this moment?
That might nip the overly aggressive ganking in the bud.
2 Likes
Ironically, CODE hasn’t figured out about the “Shadow Miners” inside Jita Yet, which I find hilarious.
Some Miners are coming up with some really good and creative ways to the point some places you don’t see open air miners. But if you start to combat scan, it gets interesting really really quick.
1 Like
May I point out that Corvettes also make one of the most perfect Gank ships?
Tell me where the risk is when you gank a ship that can’t shoot back?
1 Like
I’m not looking for advice, I’m here to have a debate on added risk to the sandbox. Can we get a DEV to speak up and tell us why the gankers did not get more risk added to their career path?
2 Likes
I had some a similar idea.
2 Likes
Its not even so much that I even want a change, although years ago I would have advocated for one. However, the perpetual voiced desire for change in this department does get old. So I might support all safeties changing to green automatically in 0.8 systems or above just so we can say there is a place where you for sure will not get ganked and cannot even make a dumb mistake and get yourself Concorded. That might make everyone happy enough that we hardly talk about changes to high sec ganking any more.
CCP wants more risk in the game so why not the gankers, why should a ganker not get more risk added to their career path as every one else has just gotten. Why should a ganker not feel the same risk that a freighter pilots feels or a hulks pilots?
2 Likes
As a miner and as much as it sucks, being ganked add to the thrill of the game. I would not want to stop gankers from working every where but they should have more risk added to their career path.
1 Like