I am not. Anecdotal evidence is not general evidence.
You are irretrievably lost.
go educate yourself
Anecdotal evidence is also frequently misinterpreted via the availability heuristic, which leads to an overestimation of prevalence. Where a cause can be easily linked to an effect, people overestimate the likelihood of the cause having that effect (availability). In particular, vivid, emotionally charged anecdotes seem more plausible, and are given greater weight. A related issue is that it is usually impossible to assess for every piece of anecdotal evidence, the rate of people not reporting that anecdotal evidence in the population.
Okay, let’s try it another way.
(Semi-)AFK mining is common, uncommon or rare. Anecdotal evidence shows it’s not non-existent. I might even think that Anderson Geten herself enjoys AFK Orca mining, based on earlier discussions, but as I have never seen this nor has she told me so I will not use this as yet more anecdotal evidence.
Now let’s skip the ‘how many people do AFK mine’ and get to the important part:
AFK mining is bad, let’s do something about it to stop it from happening.
True. As soon as you have one example it therefore is proven not non existent.
That’s a personal attack.
You are claiming that I defend this position because it would benefit me.
No. You have no evidence of that. Not even anecdotal.
Well if your issue is “lightly bad” and uncommon, then there is no reason to take actions against it especially if those actions can lead to more harm than there was in the first place.
This guy is exaggerating the frequency of it in order to inflate the harm of the issue.
I’m really trying hard not to pick a side here but I do think that you might be a little bit wrong here @Anderson_Geten.
In terms of evidence not existing to support the idea that AFK mining is not common place, then I think there is a fair bit of evidence that it does go on
Having said this, I’d fully accept that none of the evidence is conclusive enough to absolutely define exactly how much of it is going on.
As I wrote, it’s because you need to know how many people are actually ATK. Which people don’t care about.
They just find 10 ppl who don’t respond to PM, and then conclude “it’s common”. That’s just complete BS.
They don’t even define what IS “semi AFK” in the first place. Watching movie on one screen while having another one to check the fleet ?
AFK is already defined : it means people are not at the keyboard. They want to use this term for claiming people are not playing, but this term is incorrect to start with. If someone is present at the keyboard but not reacting, does not make him away from keyboard.
This is just a huge amount of lies in order to inflate their personal taste (or jealousy) into a big general issue. They keep repeating that to themselves in an echo chamber, not even caring about what other people say : they affirmed it, so it MUST be true.
1 Like
That’s a very fair point.
Just because someone doesn’t respond doesn’t actually make them AFK. They might not talk to you because they’re busy chatting to someone else, because you’re not speaking their language of choice, or maybe because they just don’t want to chat to you.
I literally have no idea what this actually means is a descriptive term!
True.
Whilst I think there’s a lot of merit in this statement, to be fair I think it might apply to a lot of the sub-communities in EVE, tanker, miners, haulers, industrialists, et al.
It means someone who is going back and forth between whatever and their computer, or someone who is sitting at their computer but focused mostly on something else. Like I might have EVE running but I am sitting here cutting flashcards with scissors, then notice someone has gone flashy yellow in local and then I drop the scissors and go hunting for that person.
Either way they may or may not react in a timely way, unlike someone who has actually gone outside of their house and has no plan to go back in for some time and could not even hear warning sounds of their ship getting attacked. That person is really AFK.
For the most part, a skiff can tank through a few gankers. Then concord is there.
However, a skiff is still a couple hundred million killmail, so some will do whatever necessary to kill you.
The best bet is to make it a space tank, pay attention to local, and set your dscan to 4au. If you see a bunch of caracals, it’s time to GTFO.
You could also leave that area and mine in areas not typically frequented by gankers.
Who ganks in caracals? Talos, Cats, Thrasher…
I believe the caracal would be fine for low sec miner ganking, as would a lot of ships.
Even for hi-sec ganking where loss of the caracal is guaranteed, there might be a way its worthwhile, even if just for the surprise factor, cause cats are just obvious.
1 Like
A gank can only happen in HiSec. Any other place in space, its just PvP.
1 Like
My understanding was that the definition of ganking in EVE, in its purest sense, is an armed ship tackling a non-armed ship, eg: a Catalysts attacking an Orca. In a situation where both ships are armed, it’s not ganking as such but consensual or non-consensual PvP. And I wasn’t aware of a language change depending on the security status of the system.
Or have I misunderstood?
2 Likes
It generally refers to ‘suicide’ ganking and the salty tears that provides in highsec.
There are not alot of recent illustrations of lowsec salty ganks but there are some classics like: Parallux
I would go with deifintion five linked below, where it is cited/claimed that the origin of “gank” comes from “gang kill” and offers the following two definitions:
- To kill another player using a group of players
- To kill another player using any means that places the played to be killed at a substantial disadvantage.
Although I think even that definition is a little incomplete, but essentially accurate.
The term may be usually used in a certain way in EVE, but the term is not exclusive to EVE and it did not even start with EVE. EVE has no monopoly on the term, so I wlll use it in its general sense and tend to understand it that way. If you want to differentiate, you better say “hisec ganking” or something, because people most certainly can, and do, run around low and null sec and murder characters with far superior numbers or weapon advantage, with no provocation or warning, with the victim at a total disadvantage and no choice but to do anything but die.
I suppose another differentiation could and should be for example, a “war gank” where there is a declaration of war, but all or most of the other caveats apply.
I would say essentially ganking is killing with ridiculous advantage, esp. with no justifiable reason, which is why I have no respect for the practice.
2 Likes
Thanks for that post @Ridley_Rohan. Well written and really interesting stuff.
I did know that the term was non-exclusive to EVE, although not that it originated from ‘gang kill’.
In a similar way to you, I don’t have much respect for the act of suicide ganking against miners, primarily because it’s almost always a case of fairly well armed attack ships taking on a mining ship that is set up for ore extraction and has no weaponry fitted.
Having said this, and I write here as someone who mines on a regular basis, ‘bots and people trying to effectively cheat the system (because they don’t want to deal with the grind of mining) really annoys me and if gankers only targeted those people, I could see it getting effective and tacit support from the legitimate mining community.
2 Likes
I dont think you could be more wrong. A freighter is the only ship class that has no aggressive options.
According to CCP Suicide Ganking (or Ganking for short) is only possible in High Sec. Anywhere else it’s just getting dead. Although the word Gank in general in a short quick word to use for killing someone, using the right word actually matters or it may cause confusions. Eve Wiki trumps Urban Dictionary when playing Eve Online.
Fairly impressively @CowRocket_Void, you have successfully managed to find an exception to the rule. Well done.
I looked at the list that you linked to and you’re absolutely right, there are indeed ten pages of various kills involving an ORE mining ship.
I then looked at some of the detail in the first five pages. There are roughly 250 kills in total but only 14 of these actually took place in high sec, the vast majority were in null or low sec space.
I didn’t look at every kill report, but having picked some random examples, in most cases, the mining ship had significant help from others. Based on this, I assume that the tactical logic being used is to deploy the mining ship as a bait ship to draw in the prey before they pounce.
In my experience this practice is pretty unusual for high sec (although I’ve heard of bait ships before, I’ve never witnessed it in 13 years of playing), however based on your input I have now edited my original post.