# The cost of suicide ganking is too low **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [November 17, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033 "2017-11-17T16:12:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Fabulous\_Rod](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/fabulous_rod/32/34799_2.png) [@Fabulous\_Rod](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Fabulous_Rod)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/1 "2017-11-17T16:12:33Z")
I would love to go after suicide gankers but you can’t inflict meaningful losses against these guys because they are always flying disposable ships. I’m very glad that suicide ganking is possible, but in its current form, suicide gankers take practically zero risk for the potential for tremendous rewards. Lacking in equity, SG seems to have become a common griefer tactic and the popular path of least resistance for those looking to flex their aggression, and because of that, has decreased the potential for more interactive pvp in low and null. . Additionally, you can’t even follow them around in high sec or you can be banned for harassment. Never in a pvpmmorpg have I been so denied the potential for vengence and it makes me wonder why this apparent detriment to the game has been allowed to continue as it has. I propose that suicide ganking require more expensive ships in high sec. This would actually force them to take a risk for their reward, and provide more reward and satisfaction for those looking to combat or seek revenge on those benefiting from what is commonly perceived as a cowardly practice. I’m not sure what the best way to do it is but it would be good to hear some ideas. It feels really dumb that you can’t even autopilot in a shuttle without some coward, who probably gets ■■■■ on in every other game they play, blowing you up just because they can and because it costs them next to nothing. Perhaps some kind of shield that only certain types of ships would be able to penetrate. Or an expensive module that must be equipped in order to suicide gank. Alternatively, cost could come in the form of negative security status, which gankers should be forced to manage via new rules, or risk making themselves easy targets. If you agree that this is an issue, what would you propose be done about it? Edit: The thread has gotten very long and full of spammers who are injecting irrelevant rhetoric, and so I wanted to highlight many of the relevant posts and questions posted pertaining to this topic. These seem to be the more sensible posters: > [@Mesacc](#): > > I agree with OP. EVE is supposed to be all about risk vs reward. Miners risk expensive ships. Gankers risk absolutely nothing. You pop them and they come right back with another disposable ship, only this time you have a war dec on you. Sec status hit is meaningless. EVE needs ganking to a point but there needs to be balance and gankers need to have skin in the game. Something to lose. Something that hurts of they fail. > [@Jehle](#): > > Yeah its getting them back thats hard. They are often in alts who only gank in cheap ships, they are already constantly running from faction police so are hard to catch, and they rightly wont accept a fleet fight. > [@Mesacc](#): > > Planned and calculated? i doubt that. Gankers are known to gank empty freighters just for the lols and padding kill boards. > [@Divad\_Mahdits](#): > > It’s not even about monetary gain. Look at CODE for example. They gank so they can just make you lose your assets, to hinder you from getting your own progress; basically they suicide gank for the sake of it. They loose nothing and their victims lose probably everything. > [@Abyss\_Azizora](#): > > While suicide ganking is very much an important mechanic in eve, I do admit he has a point that it’s really damn cheap to do it. It used to cost a lot more to do pre-dessy dps mega-buff, and pre-attack battlecruisers. CCP did a little to help counter this with tanking buffs on the weak freightors, and by removing insurance scams on concord suicides, but it’s still really cheap to do, with almost guaranteed profit. > > Honestly though, the only thing that really ticks me off is that you can fix a completely borked security status by throwing isk at it now. Back when you had to grind that crap back up for each suicide alt (Or get banned by biomassing.) it was a lot more work. Bring that back, and the low isk cost to replace suicide ships becomes fairly mute. > [@Shallanna\_Yassavi](#): > > No dedicated suicide ganker alt is going to fly a freighter with a kill right around. Or anything bigger than a cat or a steath bomber, for that matter. Some “I’ll just try it for giggles” types have made that mistake, but none of the usual suspects would. > > No, if you want revenge, you have to somehow find a toon the ganker doesn’t want you to find. > [@Piugattuk](#): > > I agree with the fact that it is so cheap and too easy, one of my Corp mates had a guy with 6 accounts all named in numerical orders gank him, so one guy controlling 6 accounts going around ganking, so we have 2 things going on, either 1, he pays for all 6 accounts (not likely), or 2 he plexs his 6 accounts, more likely, this means that it is so cheap to do his activities that he can afford to run those accounts. > [@Rivr\_Luzade](#): > > I am not aiming at the gankers themselves, I aim at the totally secure assets they hold in NPC stations. What you suggest is a workaround but I wonder how often you’d want to do that? Also, if you remained in space in your pod, I would also already have achieved something because now you cannot hide in a totally save NPC station for the duration of your criminal timer. This would give anti-ganking a chance to probe your pods, or your Bowhead, and wait for you. Tedious, but still possible gameplay. There are also no rookie ships in citadels, which means pulling concord off-grid becomes a tiny bit more costly because now you have to use shuttles or frigates. And if you know the citadels they use for safety of their bumpers or as docking station for their medical clones, you can just send wardecers after these corps. If medical clones die in a citadel, they would get auto assigned to the nearest low sec station. All in all more interaction, which is everything James wants. > > @Sasha_Nemtsov My suggestion is not “anti-eve”. Quite the contrary, my suggestion is totally pro-EVE. It forces non-consensual PVPers out of their save harbors and forces them to PVP. The suggestion also does not prevent any form of ganking. You are kill on sight, but you are never in sight. You hide in your NPC stations all the time until a gank arrives, then travel to the gank, gank, die to concord and are back in your NPC station. There is no way to use your kill on sight status before a gank or while you travel (if you travel at all). You make PVP go away, not my suggestion. With my suggestion, the devs can even expand on the PVP nature of EVE because currently safely hidden away PVP assets become available to the failing wardec system, more people now hold the means to actually PVP/have people PVP on their behalf. Furthermore, attacking ganker assets is a reason to log in and cooperate, as well as defending your assets is also a reason to log in for the gankers. And you can still continue to gank. > [@Vokan\_Narkar](#): > > Also, it is happening because industrial ships are riddiculously squishy and the damage output of t1 destroyers is riddiculously high. Projectile weapons as if were designed for suicide ganking entirely… > > I agree with you that suicide ganking is super easy to do and take no risk. However, as you noticed already there is a strong suicdeganker propaganda and so you will never win this “fight”. > > If you want to change this you have to start doing this too. We need more players suicide ganking t1 industrials, shuttles and capsules. This won’t be adressed by CCP if only few players will do this. > > If you can’t beat them, join them. I already did. > > Send me a mail if you want to learn how to do this, to kill capsule all you need is a alpha clone character with 2 weeks of training or 1 skill injector used. The fit costs about 4milion - as you said yourself it costs nothing… > [@Dinsdale\_Pirannha](#): > > While I believe the majority of the high sec griefers are alts of null sec players, CCP will certainly never ever release that information, as they protect the griefers at all costs. Bizarrely, CCP still believes that griefing high sec players at a ridiculously easy skill level and cost should be a cornerstone of Eve. Until that viewpoint changes, this entire thread is pointless. > [@Vokan\_Narkar](#): > > I love how everyone defending statements going against suicide-ganking is that person’s alt. > > You guys are pathetic. Everytime a thread against suicide ganking pops up you start spamming your James123 and miner bumping nonsenses, and you bring OP’s killboard “oh hey this noob got killed in retriever while he should be using procurer” or “oh hey this guy was autopiloting in capsule he deserved it” as that is suppose to be a valid argument. And if someone agrees with OP or support his statement you call him “fake” or alt. Just lol. > > There is no denial that only those not using proper fits/ships, not using instadock/undocks, not using pirat intels, not using scouts, well those who are greedy or who are not taking care are the targets of suicide ganking but how does that changes anything? It is a one-sided activity - only the ganker is having fun not his target (which is basically whats called griefing in other games but this is eve right). And, because of how it works, the victim has next to zero chance to avenge. Gankers are in 99% time alts with one purpose - to gank in highsec. They never fly anything else than ganking ships and the only time one could attack them is when they arrive on gate to gank someone - and that is already too late. > > Because of this, gankers always wins. They take only one risk - failing the gank (which means the ganker made a mistake in choosing a target or during gank). Even then, unless the target is Freigher failing a gank is still not costing anything other than time. The expenses for suicide-ganking are almost neglectible (maybe except Tornado ganking but while that is expensive for me, it is probably not expensive for those doing it). > > I am not OP’s alt, if you compare his posts and mine you will clearly see it. I am suicide ganking with several alts - alts specifically purposes for that activity only. I do however fix my security status. Imo the biggest problem here is that majority of the gankers are not doing this. In my opinion, you should not be able to live in highec with -10 sec status. If you want sucide gank, use the options to raise your security status - options that balances this activity out, you ither pay lots of ISKs or you take your time to raise it via ratting. What CODE is doing is essentially exploiting the system… > [@Dinsdale\_Pirannha](#): > > PCU today: 37,917 > > PCU 13 months ago, Sunday Oct 16: 35,231 > > Wow, Eve has had an uptick…oh wait, that was ALL paying subs 13 months ago. > > Yeah, all these decisions CCP have made have been a smashing success. > > Like allowing high sec griefing to continue unabated has been a smashing success. > [@Lienzo](#): > > The cost of using anonymous alts for logistics is also very low. > > From the other side, the loss to the playerbase in emergent content is quite high. How much more interesting it would be to have seamy dealings, protection rackets and players alternately collaborating and conniving, we have this boring and stale situation. > > It would be incrementally better if every ship larger than a frigate had to pay a mass based docking fee with a multiplier affected by their corporate standing to that station’s owner. Players in NPC corps would have a much more trying time of it and be at a general competitive disadvantage versus those players who conduct their business in the light of day. > > With omnipresent alts plying the freight lanes, all you have are these impersonal dealings, and the need for duck taped solutions to maintain the veneer of interaction between players. > [@Kieron\_VonDeux](#): > > That is BS. > > I’ve started several new characters out of boredom to try NPE or mine and everyone one of them had a CODE. alt attempt to gank them within the first 30 days of playing the game, most within a week or two. > > And more to the point, it depends on which characters are considered. > > All new characters including alts of veteran players, or only first time players. Half of my alts have never undocked. > [@Charley\_Varrick](#): > > I used to get a lot of lols out of their ramblings and justifications for their dooshbaggary. Now I just scroll past them. They refuse to see the imbalance. Actually, they see the imbalance just fine they just don’t want to lose the advantage. EVE is risk vs reward. We take the risk. They take none. If they succeed they get the reward. If we succeed we get nothing. They hide behind game mechanics until the last second and leave us no way to effectively fight back. We must gimp our ships for a small chance to survive and end the end we are still at the mercy of their mood. Instead of understanding this they play forum wars and spew babble to corrupt and dilute the problem. Meanwhile EVEs population continues to decline. > [@Charley\_Varrick](#): > > Some of us just like to kick back, mine rocks, run missions and enjoy our Internet space ships. Some of you are hell bent on ruining it for us. > > As for why take such risk… I call BS because gankers take none. It was said earlier in this thread (may have been you) that gankers don’t care about sec. status or ship losses. You can scroll up if you want and find it. I don’t play the quote tree game and I don’t feel like looking. So what exactly are YOU risking? Ships you have endless funding for and meaningless security status obviously don’t matter. > [@Mesacc](#): > > Thanks for taking the time to put all this in one post. I have been trying to follow this thread but through all the personal attacks and off topic rambling the important stuff gets buried. > > As a miner I’m not looking for a magic module and I don’t want ganking to go away like some suggest. I want gankers to have skin in the game. They like to throw around numbers and cost but even if they fail the don’t feel the hurt when they are backed by very wealthy lowsec corps. As a casual player losing a 300mill barge can set me back several months while gankers ships are payed for or donated. It cost them nothing. they dont feel the hurt like I do. > > IMO the best solution would be to make security status matter. Once they get below a point they should lose access to all NPC stations. Anyone they interact with in space (orca alt as a base of operation for example) should become suspect. This would at least give players a target for retaliation. Since they love to force their play style on others, a way to force them to run missions would only be fair. As for bumping…This needs to go. It’s nothing but a cheap way around game mechanics. Warp scramblers and stabilizers are in the game for a reason. A player comes prepared with stabilizers, gankers resort to bumping to which there is no counter. I wouldn’t mind seeing remote warp core stabilizers in the future so fleet members could help out when gankers adapt and start fitting scramblers on every gank ship. Black Pedro,The Antichrist666 diablo13, dracvlad had many good posts as well that are worth reading. ---
**Author:** ![Patti\_Potato\_Patrouette](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/patti_potato_patrouette/32/18901_2.png) [@Patti\_Potato\_Patrouette](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Patti_Potato_Patrouette)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 4:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/2 "2017-11-17T16:38:12Z")
But, Is the cost of suicide ganking too low? or is balanced by the extreme cost of listening to whining about how easy it is, from those who do not appreciate the GUARANTEED loss of your assets, for possibly ZERO reward (lootfairy is mean u know), is the defention of taking a risk. also correlation does not equal causation- so your narrative about decreasing the potential for interactive pvp in low and null is basically padding, but thanks for the info. /end thread ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Pedro](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/black_pedro/32/257285_2.png) [@Black\_Pedro](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Black_Pedro)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 4:40pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/3 "2017-11-17T16:40:43Z")
I don’t know. It’s already pretty easy to get around highsec perfectly safely. And outside pods, shuttles, Ventures and perhaps some frigates, it is pretty hard to gank anything in something “cheap” before CONCORD gets you. You need either a fleet or something pretty expensive (i.e. a Tornado or the like) to solo gank anything of value. I think if you want to criminals to fly anything not disposable, you probably have to relax some of the more annoying aspects of highsec like the Faction Police. If you just make it super risky (like it is now) where if anyone tackles you, you die to the Faction Police, no criminal is going to undock in anything of value. If you make it super costly, they just won’t undock at all unless someone has made themselves a very valuable target and you have even less chance for interaction between players. You wouldn’t be able to go after suicide gankers because there would hardly be any left. It’s a tough nut to crack really. If there is some ship too vulnerable to suicide ganking, I think the solution is to buff the EHP or buff the ship in some other way. That might require criminals to use more expensive ships, but they can always just bring more cheaper ships (if they can find enough friends). Not sure there is any way out of this and probably the whole criminal system needs to be thrown out and rebuilt from the ground up to do what you say you want to achieve. ---
**Author:** ![Toxic\_Yaken](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/toxic_yaken/32/382143_2.png) [@Toxic\_Yaken](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Toxic_Yaken)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/4 "2017-11-17T17:01:22Z")
Realistically, if you want to make it so gankers are more engageable you need to do something to change Facpol/Concord. I like the idea of there being an extreme damage output penalty for gankers and a far longer response time for Concord to give gankers more flexibility in the ships and strategies that they can use and more opportunities for intervention by other players. But I also think that CCP doesn’t want to touch crimewatch with a 10 foot pole. ---
**Author:** ![Salah\_ad-Din\_al-Jawahiri](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/salah_ad-din_al-jawahiri/32/172034_2.png) [@Salah\_ad-Din\_al-Jawahiri](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Salah_ad-Din_al-Jawahiri)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/5 "2017-11-17T17:02:58Z")
> [@Fabulous\_Rod](#): > > Additionally, you can’t even follow them around in high sec or you will be banned for griefing. Citation needed. ---
**Author:** ![Anderson\_Geten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anderson_geten/32/390041_2.png) [@Anderson\_Geten](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Anderson_Geten)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:07pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/6 "2017-11-17T17:07:58Z")
Eve is made of simple rules, like : “you attack someone in HS = you die” You cannot make a rule like “suicide ganking requires expensive ships”, the meaning is too broad to be understood by a computer. Would you have more precise terms to use ? I notice following terms that are too broad : - suicide ganking : which ? catalysts ? talos ? nades ? - requires : how to enforce that ? - expensive : what’s the line ? - ships : do you include implants, guns ? tags to increase ss ? ---
**Author:** ![Sindara\_T\_Soni](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/sindara_t_soni/32/242945_2.png) [@Sindara\_T\_Soni](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Sindara_T_Soni)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/7 "2017-11-17T17:15:36Z")
> [@Fabulous\_Rod](#): > > Never in a pvpmmorpg have I been so denied the potential for vengence I think this is the issue for me. You can fly into a High Sec system and find a whole fleet of gankers (or that one guy with 11 alts that forms his own ganking fleet) and be absolutely unable to do anything about them, because if you attack you get Concorded. They are pretty much invulnerable until they decide to act and then it is too late. It reminds me of other MMOs with the option to turn PvP on or off on non-PvP servers. You can basically use the immunity gained from not being flagged for PvP to find a PvP flagged target, get into position, surround your enemy without risk, then quickly flag for PvP, kill the target and escape. Okay in EVE ‘escaping’ is dying to Concord (in a ship you didn’t mind losing in the first place) but it’s pretty much the same concept / loophole. I dunno what the solution would be though? If you’ve been Concorded recently then you stay attackable for a day? A week? If you’re a proven ganker you lose your ability to hide behind the protection of Concord? Real consequences needed … 🤔 Essentially what we allow at the moment is for murderers to murder and then freely walk the streets under the noses of those they murdered just minutes later, the idea being that because they lost a ship (that they didn’t mind losing anyway) that they have paid the price. Bit of a joke really. We have a very strange Police force in EVE, that punishes a murderer, then ignores all the psychiatric evaluations that tell them that person is going to murder again, and instead instantly let them loose and protect them … funny society us future humans developed when we passed through the EVE gate … Just thinking out loud, interesting subject. ---
**Author:** ![Ima\_Wreckyou](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ima_wreckyou/32/235531_2.png) [@Ima\_Wreckyou](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ima_Wreckyou)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:19pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/8 "2017-11-17T17:19:43Z")
The cost for troll-posting is too low. Yet I don’t make a thread about it ---
**Author:** ![The\_AntiChrist666\_Diablo13](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/the_antichrist666_diablo13/32/35162_2.png) [@The\_AntiChrist666\_Diablo13](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/The_AntiChrist666_Diablo13)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:22pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/9 "2017-11-17T17:22:20Z")
If you cause trouble in high sec, your character become a problem for the law, that’s the most logic route. ---
**Author:** ![Mesacc](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mesacc/32/173151_2.png) [@Mesacc](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Mesacc)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:22pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/10 "2017-11-17T17:22:22Z")
I agree with OP. EVE is supposed to be all about risk vs reward. Miners risk expensive ships. Gankers risk absolutely nothing. You pop them and they come right back with another disposable ship, only this time you have a war dec on you. Sec status hit is meaningless. EVE needs ganking to a point but there needs to be balance and gankers need to have skin in the game. Something to lose. Something that hurts of they fail. ---
**Author:** ![Aurelius\_Vicci](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/aurelius_vicci/32/34999_2.png) [@Aurelius\_Vicci](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Aurelius_Vicci)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:34pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/11 "2017-11-17T17:34:51Z")
K… so I’m gonna take this at face value despite the “if it quacks like a troll” rule. It sounds like you’re asking for somebody to tank your ship for you. Is that what you’re asking for? Because to a certain extent this concession has already been made in the form of the procurer/skiff, etc. A properly tanked ship is _already_ expensive to gank, in terms of the ships required, the guaranteed loss in exchange for an uncertain reward, as has already been mentioned, or in terms of the time/effort required to assemble a big group of gankers, or a smaller group that has developed the skill required to multibox a catalyst fleet. What more do you want, exactly? The mouse already got his cookie, and his glass of milk. I just don’t know what else anybody can offer you short of literally playing the game for you. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_C0ld](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/captain_c0ld/32/471894_2.png) [@Captain\_C0ld](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Captain_C0ld)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 5:52pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/12 "2017-11-17T17:52:27Z")
So do it yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Sere\_O\_Asis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/sere_o_asis/32/515651_2.png) [@Sere\_O\_Asis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Sere_O_Asis)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:05pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/13 "2017-11-17T18:05:03Z")
> [@Sindara\_T\_Soni](#): > > I dunno what the solution would be though? If you’ve been Concorded recently then you stay attackable for a day? A week? Kill rights are already awarded. If the player receiving the kill right chooses not to act on it, or to not sell the kill right, or even just make it public, there isn’t much anyone can do about that. However the subject of a kill right still has to live with the threat of retribution, from potentially, all quarters for 30 days. > **[Kill Rights](https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/203208922-Kill-Rights)** > > Kill rights are a pilot's chance of retribution and are provided in cases where they have been wronged by another individual in the eyes of CONCORD. This means that if a pilot has performed an ille... ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Little](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/do_little/32/411571_2.png) [@Do\_Little](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Do_Little)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:27pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/14 "2017-11-17T18:27:07Z")
In my opinion, suicide gankers provide a necessary element of risk in high security space. They kill a tiny fraction of miners, haulers and mission runners but some people never figure out what they are doing wrong and get killed over and over. There are systems where you can mine in peace - they tend to be a long way from trade hubs. A retriever fit for maximum yield is a much more attractive target than a procurer fit for maximum tank. T2 transports are much safer way to haul stuff than T1 industrials - racial industrial 5 takes 3 weeks to train - it should be at the top of your list if you intend to haul valuables anywhere in New Eden. Your first step is know your enemy and what you can do to protect yourself [https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Suicide\_Ganking\_101](https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Suicide_Ganking_101) And heed the words of wisdom from Einstein: ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/3X/d/d/ddd6a9913640b6fd6a7ab7474e45d7b4b778c19c.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Keno\_Skir](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/keno_skir/32/460582_2.png) [@Keno\_Skir](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Keno_Skir)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:33pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/15 "2017-11-17T18:33:37Z")
> [@Fabulous\_Rod](#): > > Additionally, you can’t even follow them around in high sec or you will be banned for griefing. No you won’t. Follow them if you feel like it. > [@Fabulous\_Rod](#): > > It feels really dumb that you can’t even autopilot in a shuttle without some coward, who probably gets ■■■■ on in every other game they play, blowing you up just because they can The word you’re looking for is “freedom”. Why were you autopiloting a shuttle with valuable cargo, or if the cargo was not valuable what’s the problem? ---
**Author:** ![Fabulous\_Rod](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/fabulous_rod/32/34799_2.png) [@Fabulous\_Rod](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Fabulous_Rod)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:39pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/16 "2017-11-17T18:39:16Z")
> [@Aurelius\_Vicci](#): > > It sounds like you’re asking for somebody to tank your ship for you. Is that what you’re asking for? 🤣 Its actually comical how so many in this thread have failed to comprehend or are unwilling to acknowledge what this thread is really about. Several of you need to read the first sentence of the OP and try again. > [@Mesacc](#): > > I agree with OP. EVE is supposed to be all about risk vs reward. Miners risk expensive ships. Gankers risk absolutely nothing. You pop them and they come right back with another disposable ship, only this time you have a war dec on you. Sec status hit is meaningless. EVE needs ganking to a point but there needs to be balance and gankers need to have skin in the game. Something to lose. Something that hurts of they fail. This guy gets it.👍 ---
**Author:** ![Arcanith\_Lionheart](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arcanith_lionheart/32/218531_2.png) [@Arcanith\_Lionheart](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arcanith_Lionheart)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:39pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/17 "2017-11-17T18:39:35Z")
You know that low risk high reward is visible when you see this [https://forums.eveonline.com/uploads/short-url/jOsbewyBdaNg7wtXD4U0yhDz2E6.jpg](https://forums.eveonline.com/uploads/short-url/jOsbewyBdaNg7wtXD4U0yhDz2E6.jpg) That or this one guy just has a lot of disposable income ---
**Author:** ![Jehle](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/jehle/32/390836_2.png) [@Jehle](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Jehle)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/18 "2017-11-17T18:42:49Z")
May not he the same guy! J is a popular starting letter for character names because it appears in the middle of the list of alphabetically ordered overviews. They dont get primaried first! People making ganking alts will know and understand this. ---
**Author:** ![Arcanith\_Lionheart](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arcanith_lionheart/32/218531_2.png) [@Arcanith\_Lionheart](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arcanith_Lionheart)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:43pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/19 "2017-11-17T18:43:14Z")
What about the last name? ---
**Author:** ![Jehle](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/jehle/32/390836_2.png) [@Jehle](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Jehle)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 6:44pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033/20 "2017-11-17T18:44:39Z")
Uh… Group of players decided to make ganking alts and colluded to create characters with the same last name? Goonswarm did this with vcbee [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-cost-of-suicide-ganking-is-too-low/40033.md?page=2)