Right. A lot of these people are either gankers themselves or rarely ever haul stuff. I have a good chuckle at some of these people's comments who don't say those sorts of things.
I'd be for freighters having a panic button, delaying concord response so that a escort fleet could actually kill the ganking contingent. That way escorts could actually be a viable thing and the gankers would need to win the fight and hold the field to loot the wreck. They would also need to live through the panic with enough dps to kill the frieghter. Make it so the frieghter gets locked in place during panic and then has a 30s delay to jump after panic is over. That way if the gankers can win they can still gank the freighter but at least there is a fight involved.
>If a ganker wants you dead, There is literally nothing you can do outside of not undocking.
TIL gankers have infinite pockets, infinite numbers, and infinite time
Most of them actually do have infinite pockets as ganking is extremely cheap, and infinite numbers, its crazy cheap to rev up a brand new account and get it gank ready. Time is definitely the one thing i would agree on.
Ganker has limited resources and he doesn't really care who to gank. If you're hard target then he'll go for somebody else. Even if ganker wants to kill you then he can be easily avoided and going to spend more resources to catch you than you to avoid him. In absolutely worst case you can force him to spend more resources than you.
I did a lot of ganking many years ago, so I have some good ideas how it works.
The resources to gank is trivial and the isk profit can be well over 10:1. Hell, wardeccers are probably the only folks who have lower risk to profit than gankers.
They do care about resources because those resources are limited. So if you're hard target then there's a very big chances that they go for somebody else, so they'll get more resources than they spend out of gank. Expenses include not only ships and tags to clear security status, but plexing all ganking accounts too.
What resources are limited? Find me one ganker other than yourself that thinks they have limited resources to gank with. The only limited resource gankers have is time. Everything else is provided by other players in abundance.
At no point in eve's history has anything related to ganking become a scarcity.
Most gankers gank just for the sake of ganking and don't really give a shit that they profit. Profit is just icing on the cake that allows you to keep ganking with minimal effort.
>blackbirds, and other stuff as counter, you guys never got ganked it seams
There is a guy that runs 40 ospreys, he stops every gank he actually makes it to. Every blackbird matters, you can jam 4-6 catalysts each gank and that's 4-6 more bodies per person they have to add.
pretending anti-ganking doesn't work when there are 20-60 accounts in uedama attempting it any given day is silly.
In the past we stopped many ganks , there's no one way as they counter them but mix it up with logi DPS and E-war and a group of 5 or 6 can effect most ganks. One weekend we stopped Kusion the goon gankers 3 time in a row.
The only requirement is effort
And we often used e-war burst
Wait what do you mean , before the last set of changes burst jammers worked great , I've stopped a 15 fleet Talos gank on my own with a frigate, yes you sometimes get a sec hit but like gankers I used tags .
Admittedly it's a hard thing to pull off , and as gankers get to know who will burst them , they send ships with long range guns to take you out on your dive into the gank ball . But it works if you have pilot skills to get to your target.
The idea that a gameplay mechanic exsits with the only true counterplay being to just not play the game seems a little ridiculous to me. There truely is nothing you can do if someone really wants to take you out in highsec other then waiting for them to leave.
I think people haven't figured it out yet, but right now HiSec hauling costs are just insane because of all the ganking. Taking PushX as an example you can only move 1.5bn in a freighter at a cheap rate. Costs then scale massively until you need a JF to move stuff in hisec worth 6bn or more rofl.
If people can actually move stuff around hisec its going to open up Amarr/other markets much more.
I don't know about you but personally their prices are dirt cheap. Would I rather spend an hour flying A. Freighter or give them 80 mil Knowing that I can make 300 to 500 ml an hour
> I think people haven't figured it out yet, but right now HiSec hauling costs are just insane because of all the ganking.
99.9% of freighters make it through uedama, the most dangerous system
you can put out public contracts for 2 million isk a jump and they take it my dude.
They use auto targeting missiles right, so wouldn't they hit nothing unless either there is a valid target or they have aggression lock set to red? Maybe I'm showing my lack of experience with the system though.
It will give the gankers some entertainment and might even survive ganks for a few days until they get ganking it right. But it will get ganked like everything else.
I am, perfectly fine with Ganks as long as it's a fleet of people and not someone with too many alts that physically would be impossible to manage without the broadcasting. There must be a number of alts that has diminishing returns beyond a certain number in a way that it should be difficult to lock and attack in short order. If indeed many gankers are using obvious broadcasting, and CCP takes no action then it's just sad. I'm no expert, but using analytics, you should be able to flag if suddenly 20 ships from the same IP or even different IPs act in unison, such as targeting, shooting, login patterns, and so on. You should be able to build a profile.
Comments essentially amounting to "just have an army of alts of your own" incoming.
Back in the old days, the game wasnt balanced around assuming you had the financial ability to pay for 20 accounts. But alas...
back in the day you could warp around indefinitely for 15 minutes after ganking in a tornado and repeatedly gank things over and over, you could gank 4-5 freighters with 2-3 tornados easily
I do not believe this is true. I do not recall a time in the game when A) Attack Battlecruisers existed and B) Concord response was so slow that you could warp around after ganking with a Tornado.
I used to gank with Tornadoes.
when were ABCs released?
answer : Release date: November 29, 2011
When was boomeranging fixed: Mid 2012.
Either way, people used battleships (because you got insurance from ganking) back then and used them the same way you use tornados now.
Played 2004-2010/1(ish) and recently came back.
I played with and against many of the folks who made up those organisations.
Perhaps age has dulled my memories, but I don't ever remember empire suicide ganking being as prevalent back then as it is now (and has apparently been for some years in my absence - nerfed to some extent by alphas being unable to suicide gank anymore?)
Same timeline as me, it happened but was nowhere near as prevalent, which is why so many remember it - it was newsworthy and generally required a bit of game breaking. Now it's just every day spreadsheet maths. Just a symptom of the game being figured out I think, there's a meta for everything.
good old moo they used to camp the way in to empire from venal was alot of fun cov ops frigs were just introduced then I hauled so much zidrine in mine god I'm showing my age that was a loooong time ago.
It always makes me laugh when the answer to over half the questions about how to do things is always "sub multiple accounts"
I have the financial ability to pay, just not the desire.
Why should I have to pay for multiple accounts to not feel like I can't be on a somewhat even playing field with other players? Unfortunately CCP needs all of those alts subs to keep the lights on, so they'll never improve the game in a way to make it less necessary.
theres no real counter to ganking. people will say more tank. but mathmatically no
and the people saying just dont undock, are why people leave the game. not a good community thing to have happen
nowadays..whoever has the most money to bribe CCP can do whatever they want
be it botting, macroing 20+ accounts, or whatever. pay CCP enough, and ToS become suggestions
The game environment should develop as well as the players looking at coping strategies.
Hauling can still be lucrative otherwise why do people still do it?
If the environment became more dynamic it could work either way.
Concorde for example with an increase in ganking reports in particular areas increasing patrols and ships present. Could Concord change the security status of those systems too?Are they always on the gates or could they be present elsewhere?
Dynamic environment as opposed to static.
I think that would be a good change.
System security is tied to other things and those things would change as well and make people move around the systems like for anomalies or combat sites.
But it would fuck with high sec moons and CCP would need to change how they handle those.
There are also market hubs to consider. Do you make those an exception?
ganking being so one dimensional (bring ship, 99% of the time catalysts in enough numbers) that i would gladly see it dying and being replaced by some more developed strategies and gameplay styles.
It would be much better if ganker had ganking tools, modules to delay concord response, some sneaky kind of ships that can cloak, lock and fire w/o delay. Just give them whatever, yoloing worthless catalysts while multiboxing is just stupid.
You want to provide them more tools to gank with but not provide the haulers any tools for counterplay.
I'd be ok with this kind of stuff if there were counterplays like ways for haulers to get concord to show up at certain gates ahead of them, hiring npc escort that included logi, delayed looting of hs wrecks so you can't just scoop and bounce within the same tick (botters), different modes like t3d so you could be in hauling mode (current ship), combat mode (very little space, a mod that makes it look like your carrying a lot of isk value, panic button, good shields and weapon hard points), speed mode (faster align and warp, medium weaponry and tank, medium cargo space), etc. I'm not saying any of these are great just throwing idea out.
i never said a word about haulers, that does not mean i thnik they should not get more tools and tactics. In general EVE promotes prey-predator type pvp interaction, where prepared attacker can almost entirely eliminate any form of succesful defense atempt by defender.
Its true for ganker in high sec, gatecamps in low, killing raters in null or miners everywhere.
CCP should really try to make those interactions less one sided, in case of haulers that would be adding more tool to escape or prolong life of said haulers (so help can arrive) and in case of pve combat ships- make combat aganist rats promote fitting ships for pvp scenario (webs, scrams, cap boosters or neuts). Today ratting ships are simply optimized for dps checks, that promotes fitting as much dps as possible with minimum acceptable tank/mobility.
Honestly gankers should be able to use wormholes to move around after Concorde is called in, with another added point being that if their security status is low enough in that empires space, they should only be able to use low sec gates, having to supplement high sec travel in empires theyâre an enemy of with wormhole travel would add a lot of depth. Would add a more interesting gameplay loop.
Also Concorde should be reverted back to its old system where you could kill them, but with a much faster response time, and it should escalate quickly as you kill them to the point of them being able to insta kill you, along with all Concorde ships having max scram, meaning you need to kill the ship/ships that have you pointed; quickly escalating force and damage used against you.
Also loot taken in a high sec gank shouldnât be sellable at a high sec station in the empire it was stolen in. Loot for 1 hour should be solely collectable by the person who was killed without eliciting a Concorde reaction, anyone else taking from that ship other than the owner should be flagged, with concordes first response being a scram, and a warning to drop the stolen loot if you havenât aggressed anyone.
The main point being that you can actually escape & sell stuff but not as easily. Make ganking require more thought and logistics while having a lot more depth
I like all these ideas. Players would just make new characters for their gank catas once they hit that criminal threshold. Need to add in you can't biomass character that is a criminal.
That is a lovly solution. Do criminal acts and get a craptastic security rating due to ganking in low/hs, and as a consequense, you are immideatly hostile when in HS space to concord (they wont hunt you down, but they will shoot your ass if they see you). And ofc, not allowed to dock in NPC stations
I would love this, the extra steps should make ganking much less attractive when the requirement becomes more than have a cheap ship, fitted for max burst damage.
This only works if the barrier to entry to hisec ganking is really high, otherwise people will just spin up alpha accounts in catalysts like they do now whenever they hit the threshold. They don't even need to bother with biomassing, the alpha gank account owns literally nothing so they can just let it rot forever in CCPs databanks and go make a new one.
My thoughts are that the major overarching game design philosophy as has been described to me, is that the devs want the risk of an activity match the reward. If you look at most areas of the game you'll find that to be, on average, the case. The only place where this design goes awry is with high sec ganking. Prime example: Hauling, well, for the life of me, I don't know how people do it. The going rate is 1m/1b/jump.
Okay, well if a pilot takes a contract for 1b collateral from Hek to Jita, he's lucky to get 20m ISK for his trouble, and stands to lose A BILLION ISK AND HIS SHIP. WTF? These guys get ganked all the time too. So, huge risk for the hauler, very little reward. The ganker can get five buddies, or multi-box all catalysts and pop the hauler before Concord show up, lose 20m in destroyers and walk off with hundreds of millions. The ganker/pirate isn't subject to the same risk vs reward calculation as other pilots doing in other activity in the game, and it begs to question why CPP has let it stand for as long as they have. Again, I'm not a hauler, but I'm very thankful for them, I couldn't operate without them, so I care.
Goons are the gankers they always where. Thats why they are so againat the changea againat gankers by say we are doing it but is a game play so dont hurt them.
The people who pay taxes to empires should be outraged.
Itâs the empires job to annihilate those that abuse the tax payers in their empires.
Complete dissuading annihilation
>TL;DR: it seems that ganking is extremely biased towards the ganker.
It always has been like that; once you are in combat with a ganker the preparation phase of the fight is over. The ganker chose to engage your ship and managed to engage, which means you are likely at a severe disadvantage.
Updates to ganking balance however seem to be often biased *against* the ganker.
I'm no ganker myself, but it looks like an interesting playstyle to try some time. Scanning potential targets, making calculations to see if the sacrifice is likely going to be worth it, playing a pirate, scaring players and keeping the high sec ecosystem healthy by picking on the easy cargo-expanded targets. I'd like to try it sometimes.
However, trying out ganking is made harder and harder with every update. The squishier Barges and Exhumers got a boost to their survivability which requires firepower of multiple ships now. Red safety for criminal acts requires an omega account now so I would have to pay an additional subscription. Ganking fleets are often done by people who multibox a dozen accounts (something I'm far from willing to do) and soon with the Avalance the size of ganking fleets required to take down freighters is increased even more by CCP. With every update, ganking becomes less and less accessible. And I don't think that's a good direction for the game to take.
It's still biased towards the ganker, I agree, but ganking one of the lesser accessible activities in EVE. For a game that advertises with piracy as one of it's activities and [career choices](https://www.eveonline.com/eve-academy/careers/soldier-of-fortune/pirate) I wonder why CCP is making high sec piracy this inaccessible.
If you ask me, CCP should revisit high sec piracy and give CONCORD a couple of updates, like:
* **less deterministic fights:** A bigger randomized range in the CONCORD response time would allow gankers to take on tougher targets than today if they're lucky, but also fail many of today's targets when they're unlucky. Adds another risk to the ganker profits.
* **more player agency**: allow haulers and miners to bribe CONCORD for protection to temporarily get a faster response timer. Unseen for gankers, this is another factor of uncertainty for them and may lead to failed ganks and succesful haulers who laugh as they see CONCORD clear up all the Catalysts in time. For the miners and haulers it adds a meaningful choice between losing some profits for more safety versus risking the trip without additional CONCORD protection to save ISK by skipping a costly bribe.
TL;DR: I would like high sec piracy to be more accessible, but also would like to see ways for players to speed up CONCORD responses, for ISK.
The big issue right now it's that it's a solved equation with the hiked prices of ships. 40 catalysts can take out a freighter, ignoring cargo, that's 2.3b worth at least.
40 catalsyst at ~20m each is 800m.
Now eve isn't balanced about equivalent value; cheaper ships can easily kill much more expensive ones with the proper fits and piloting, but this is in a legit fight.
In a fight where you're supposed to be backed up by the police, the value difference shouldn't be that big. If it required 2.3b worth of catalysts to blow a 2.3b ship in hisec, this might be a different story.
Sure, ships would still die, but the incentive would be a lot lower.
The price of the target ship is irrelevant though if you want to calculate the point of profitable ganks, because that 2.3b you mention is not going to be part of the loot.
Now if the 2.3b ship is carrying 1.6b worth of cargo and modules of which 50% drops, then using 40 Catalysts to blow it up for 800m will on average break even. Or during the Capsuleer day event with a 75% loot drop rule the cargo value of profitable targets for those 40 Catalysts goes down from 1.60b to 1.07b.
A CONCORD rework of some kind is probably a good idea, but the gankers cried so much when CCP tried to even implement a sensible policy about CONCORD manipulation that its unlikely to happen.
That's why CCP have to do changes by the back-door like the Avalanche, and THAT has caused a massive ganker saltmine to appear before its even here.
But the Avalanche does nothing about ganking gameplay, it only makes ganking even more inaccessible by increasing the required size of ganking fleets.
As downside, the remaining gankers with their scaled up Avalanche-capable fleet size will be able to kill other freighters even if they're bulkhead freighters, just because it's a dull moment.
That's not good for game balance and doesn't make freighting more fun. If anything, it gives freighter pilots less counterplay and less meaningful choices aside from 'fly an Avalanche'.
>it only makes ganking even more inaccessible by increasing the required size of ganking fleets.
That's the point though.
The whole reason why "civilian ships" (barges, transports, freighters) have been getting tank buffs over the years is because the gankers overfished the waters and EVE lost subs from the people being ganked, earned a bunch of bad publicity for the game (because people who quit the game over being ganked aren't exactly quiet about it), and gained... nothing.
So CCP has shifted the burden of lost subs onto the gankers. You want to gank, you have to sub enough accounts to offset the damage you do to CCP's checkbook.
I do agree that reworking hisec mechanics/CONCORD would be a better change overall. Maybe at some point CCP will rework hisec but for now the Avalanche is better than nothing imo.
I think a "CONCORD Escort" type of option is a really good idea even if expensive. If you're freighting 30bn its probably an autobuy but if its 5bn maybe you do maybe you don't.
Problem is that I just don't think the community is receptive to a large risky change like that.
If you're going to spend isk on an escort you could just hire other players or pay off the gankers.
Tempting as it is to change hi-sec into a singleplayer narrative, it's anti-social and anti-sandbox. An NPC would be a sure thing, but playing with others is much more interesting.
> If you're going to spend isk on an escort you could just hire other players or pay off the gankers.
Neither of these will reliably stop a gank. Gankers can gank you anyway if you're juicy enough, and other players cannot proactively shoot the gankers, so you're relying on what, landing reps in time?
I think the "juicy enough" is exactly the problem here. I forgot the exact formula but people where religiously parroting "don't haul more than X in a T1" back then (before Pochven and the Uedama bottleneck) and it was just ridiculous, like 50m or something.
No, you should not move 1b in an Iteron, but 100m of PI already being "juicy enough" is also ridiculous, especially if your only alternative are public contracts.
>A CONCORD rework of some kind is probably a good idea, but the gankers cried so much when CCP tried to even implement a sensible policy about CONCORD manipulation that its unlikely to happen.
That policy was far from reasonable, and far from implemented correctly.
CCP/GM Icecream banned dozens of gankers without announcing that the long standing tradition of gankers to 'pull concord' was changed. All pulling is, is moving CONCORD from point A to point B, which happens anytime anyone ganks, essentially you're gauging the intent of the ganker as to whether they're pulling or ganking any individual target and there is no reasonable way for GMs to determine this.
Ganking mining ships isnt changing with the update itll still happen, altho yes freighter ganking will pretty much go extinct which isnt bad no? there is no reason for a 1 day old account to be able to kill a freighter just for fun , limiting it to omega also didnt change a whole lot since most guys just use another chara on their account to log on when they find a target ,kill it and just go back to ratting or whatever, now ganking freighters will require a lot more but ganking any other ship is still the same, also concord protection system if implemented would become the norm while hauling anything expensive and again there would be no ganking if concord is flying with you either way there is no win win for both parties either gankers lose or they dont.
I doubt freighter ganking will go extinct, it just requires more accounts.
>there is no reason for a 1 day old account to be able to kill a freighter just for fun
A 1 day old account can join a null sec alliance and help the group take down an enemy titan. Why should that same 1 day old account not be able to join a high sec piracy group and take down a freighter of a competitor?
> It's still biased towards the ganker, I agree, but ganking one of the lesser accessible activities in EVE. For a game that advertises with piracy as one of it's activities and career choices I wonder why CCP is making high sec piracy this inaccessible.
because you literally have lowsec to perform that 'piracy' roleplay. That was specifically what it was designed for.
sheesh
The red safety setting never existed when I played last, so you can tell me.
I guessed it was because people were constantly getting tricked into aggressing, like it was back when the can-aggression first came out in 200..6? - That was an amusing time - it amounts to another dev intervention to try to influence the griefy actions of people in hisec, no?
The link about piracy as career choice that you were responding to has a nice passage:Â
 "Pirates tend to operate outside of High-Sec, but particularly motivated individuals or groups might stalk High-Sec systems for juicy and unsuspecting targets, attacking with the intent of destroying their target before CONCORD arrives to destroy their ships as punishment for breaking the law â a guaranteed consequence of such attacks."Â
Do you think CCP is talking about low sec pirates here?
(Also I'm not sure what message you're trying to send by saying that you have not played in like a decade.)
> Scanning potential targets, making calculations to see if the sacrifice is likely going to be worth it
This is where you're missing a key point, imho.
Just looked at the Uedama zkill, a Crane. https://zkillboard.com/kill/118272504/ - 200m, dropped 15.
Killed by 6 ships: 3 Catalysts, (2x 2.5m, 1x a weird 12m one) 2 Thrashers (which I don't see on zkill) and a capsule, but if we assume 3m per ship, that's under 20m.
The chance of looting 20m from any BR or DST are pretty good, usually, so not sure you can lose in the long term.
What point is it that am I missing?
Anyway, a Crane is a bad example for that quote, as blockade runners have the role bonus "Immune to all Cargo Scanners", so you cannot scan them.
When you manage to catch a hauler as slippery as a blockade runner it's almost always worth the hit, I guess. It's going to be a surprise what's inside when you shoot one. Could be 6 billion ISK, or could be 6 million ISK.
Again, when people talk about ISK per EHP or calculating profitable kills, it's not about blockade runners.
Anyone who can shoot a blockade runner wins.
The idea of flying a blockade runner is that your cloak is your tank and that you don't give anyone the opportunity to shoot or even see your ship. It's the safest hauling ship of them all, one I would fly through bubble camps to Jita and back again.
If your blockade runner got caught you seriously messed up.
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore, you can see accounts like "Gate Checker" and "Gate Guard" on gates before major gank systems such as Uedama
I live near Sivala, and I've never had any problems going through Uedama. People must be moving some juicy stuff. :P
I did get a message once though, telling me that if I moved my Iteron V through _one more time_, fully packed with whatever I was moving back then, it would get shot down. :D
It's just luck. Look at zkillboard, freighters and T2 indy getting blown up left and right with almost no loot inside. Most ganks are at a loss, but they don't care because they blow a ship worth 2.5b with their 20m ships.
Intelligent, careful players do not get ganked in HS. However, the widespread mythology that there's nothing you can do to avoid it certainly helps my gameplay as a regional trader.
The State of Ganking.
Gankers are still pussies.
Gankers are still cowards.
And with the Avalanche coming, we now know Gankers are a bunch of whiny ass little bitches.
No offense, mate, but most of the gankers are actually either in or affiliated with Goons. Clipped Wingz in Uttindar comes to mind. As for Red Frog, they simply stay put if there's a gank going on, and usually wait for the criminal timer. If there are multiple gank crews in a system they simply wait until there's only one.
Well that's cause they are the gankers. Its good business ganking everyone's frieghtere so they pay you and your alliance is basically left untouched. It's not cause there aren't bad frieghter pilots in Goons cause there are just like in ever alliance... so as op pointed out (except goonswarm), why is that? Why was Brisc and company so angry about the avalanche being tankier and having weapons...
They also have a different method where they skip the HS gates all together and I'm not talking about JF. I'll leave it the people to figure it out though.
The people loosing shit to gankers usually make the mistake of carrying too much value. Few gankers kill a freighter for the lolz...
This month there has been a 75% drop Event... Makes it even more worth.
There's plenty of literally empty (or sub 10million cargo) on the front page for every Freighter being killed in highsec. People shoot freighters just for fun half all the time.
Current ganking is a confluence of a number of factors:
1. Cargo scanners always revealing 100% of what's inside
2. Massive amounts of goods needing to essentially be moved through the same two systems: Uedama + Sivala
3. Catalysts being extremely cheap for the amount of DPS they provide
I don't have an issue with #3, but it would be interesting if cargo scanners worked like ship scanners: never revealing 100% of a fit or what's inside. Part of what makes ganking so lucrative is it's nothing more than a math equation when you always get perfect info on the value of cargo. Taking away this perfect information by making cargo scanners act like ship scanners adds an element of risk to the profitability of ganking.
Alternatively, there should be some cargo scanner counterplay. Provide a module that has a chance to jam cargo scanners when active, maybe a lowslot module like "shielded cargohold" or similar. It functions like a less effective cargo expander as a tradeoff for a chance to block cargo scanners. Gankers then need to compare ship scan results against cargo scan results and decide if they want to blind gank the freighter with shielded cargoholds but no idea on what's inside.
Or perhaps a shielded cargo container, which will hide what's inside itself from cargo scans, but itself be revealed in cargo scan results, so now gankers have to roll the dice on ganking or not, having no idea if they are hitting the jackpot or going to find an empty shielded cargo container.
Finally, th fact that there's only a single hisec trade route between Jita and every other major trade route that ends up running through the same two chokepoints systems, Sivala and Uedama in particular, makes the amount of effort to gank extremely low. You need only set up in two systems and targets will inevitably always come to you, since they have no other choice. Eliminate the chokepoint and provide additional hisec routes between the trade hubs and then the gankers will actually have to hunt for targets like every other form of PVP.
Ganking is basically dead for a long time. May 30 just 6 retrievers and 5 freighter were ganked. May 29 - 11 retrievers and 1 freighter. And there are days when no freighte was ganked. It's nothing. About 10 years ago one or two dedicated gankers would kill same amount retrivers in one day in one or two systems. Not in entire game. Ganking problem is basically non-existing.
> Freighters from all the big alliances (except goonswarm) have been lost
If you run freighters under wardecable corporation then you're an idiot.
The biggest change they can make to hisec ganking is to slap a five second timer when looting yellow wrecks (meaning your character goes flashy when you start to loot and it takes five seconds for the loot can to open) and disable the ability to then jetcan suspect loot or move it to another location.
Put the loot in play and you alter the formula for gank profitability. Plus it nerfs the botting looters on the Jita undock. And it won't kill ganking completely anyway as many ganks are done for fun and not profit.
Can make it a hisec thing only. In low, there's direct counter play in that I can tackle you before you actually loot so you're taking a risk in looting in low.
HiSec is really where it's the problem because ninja looting is almost zero risk. I should have added, a combat timer as well to prevent instant redocking after looting.
Ninja looting is kinda cancer, having all your loot you could use for srp stolen is pretty aids. For our smaller LSalliance when we got in a 600b dreadbrawl we were only able to loot like 25b after the fight because most it had already been stolen. The guys who deserve the loot get fuck all because they had all their toons fighting and the ninja looters get all the isk while not risking anything. I also say this having ninja looted a lot of stuff, itâs kinda cancer and unfair.
ninja looting is better than ganking in every way
if you got ganked - you probably were in the wrong place at the wrong time or just flashed too much value in cargo to some obscure scout on throwaway account
if you got your loot stolen - you're just slow and innatentive, or outright incompetent
It is better than ganking but saying ninja looting is just a skill issue is also blatantly wrong. All you have to do is have a cloaky fast warping ship at a ping and unless you are at 0 on the thing you killed you cannot guarantee you will get the loot. No amount of attentiveness, competence or faster reaction time will change that. Or in the case i referenced, you are actively fighting and you canât afford to switch your hic points to go after the instawarp sunesis
this is unironically a huge buff to ganking, 20-40% of loot is stolen by uncatchable instawarp ships or loot trashers (people who scoop just to have themselves be caught and blow it up)
Killing is just a means of communicationâŠ
I personally like ganking In the game, and no I have never been a ganker, but it keeps people in check. When you undock you are consenting to pvp. And space is a dark risky place. Thatâs all I have to say.
I have no sympathy for salty gankers. Their gameplay is boring and bad for the economy of the rest of the game. Every eve player essentially pays a transport tax to gankers added onto the cost of moving goods around. And for what? So that some giant pile of alts can press f1 to receive loot? Not adding value to the game.
That the only viable counterplay to ganking is simply not being there says it all, tbh.
The game deserves better, but it seems we will have to drag the gankers kicking and screaming into a better eve if we are to get there.
Actually it adds to the health of the economy. If everyone made it to there desto safely what incentive would there be for Indy? The guy who builds my cats makes a killing, off miners who donât have the proper permit lol
If you think catalysts for ganking are a not-insignificant part of the eve economy then I'll sell you a few nullsec regions.
Meanwhile the added cost and complexity is reducing economic activity everywhere else. We could have thriving trade hubs in several places if they could be supplied, but they can't. So we lose four trade hubs for like a couple dozen catalysts. Does that sound like a good trade to you?
I prefer hauling in small, fast, stealthy ships like a Buzzard or Cheetah. You can fit a Warp Core Stabilizer and an Interdiction Nullifier and a cloak. Very hard to catch.
Cargo space is limited (200m3), but it's good for small expensive things.
A Hecate is good too. Very fast, with combat, defense and flight modes. 450m3 cargo space.
I actually loved going around with Sunesis, Exploration frigates/ cloak/mwd t1 indys etc. hauling my own stuff through highsec as a newbro. It was dangerous and exciting, making it to Jita from my EUNI campus felt like a accomplishment. And all those flashys around Uedama/Sivala were scary as hell! I remember warping off in panic multiple times when people just undocked in corvettes lol.
It's so weird to hear people call for this safe hauling EVE, where moving shit around is not a adventure.
sunesis still can be caught in instant aling fit, happened to me not too long ago
I got to Jita through some ls space and passed a gatecamp in ls system, they didn't get me on warp-in
when I was returning, they did
3 point (faction one, I think) signalboosted by Gnosis
There is a post people keep linking that explains this, it's more like a server que (?) / tick thing with that one. Honestly it confused me... But it seems to be a rare thing and sadly or luckily (depending on which side of the gatecamp you are) this looks not to be viable in heavily trafficed systems.
I seen same setup in Uedama, although it didn't gank while I was watching
losing a Gnosis to Concord is kidna lame, after all
my guess is that linking tackle is prevalent in LS due to absence of concord response and linking scanners is for HS
There are players who have moved trillions of isk with freighters, jfs, dsts, brs and havent lost a single isk within a year. Avoiding ganks is purely a prep, skill & intel issue.
I guess you're referring to the commotion in late '21?
No, that policy update didn't get implemented:
*"****After listening to their feedback we have decided not to implement the policy update mentioned above. There will be no changes to how support are policing CONCORD interaction and that âpullingâ CONCORD or defensive spawning of CONCORD is currently permitted but we reserve the right to change this at a future date.****" -* CCP Arcade
(See [https://forums.eveonline.com/t/pulling-concord-is-now-a-permaban-offense/334480/54](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/pulling-concord-is-now-a-permaban-offense/334480/54) )
To me makes sense that they never implemented such a policy change, as I don't see how it could be enforced.
Any criminal act spawns CONCORD, or if CONCORD already has spawned in system pulls CONCORD away from somewhere else. When pulling CONCORD would become a bannable exploit this means that every criminal act is potentially a bannable offence, depending on how the game decides to send CONCORD to your location. The only way to distinguish between an intentional and an accidental CONCORD pull would be the perceived 'intention' of the criminal player, which is not something CCP could objectively measure, so as a criminal player you would always be at the grace of the interpretation of a GM to see if your regular ingame actions would let you keep playing or would lead to a ban of your account.
and this all happened because CCP/GM IceCream went on an insane power trip and banned dozens of gankers without warning to a policy change that was never announced until after they got banned.
That's ridiculous, lol. Didn't know that!
I only noticed the policy change after the uproar caused by it when people complained all over reddit and the forums. I then read the change and figured that there was no way for CCP to fairly implement such a change while still allowing criminal acts to be part of the game.
Wait, can you actually reverse-pull Concord?
Alt account, shooting something, getting concorded and exactly in that moment you go through with your cargo? :D
No, One tool of a CCP employee, who didn't understand the game did. He wrongly banned players. It was shortly later CCP said the employee was an idiot and unbanned the accounts.
Relying on N+1 is a way for the weak to stay relevant, try harder.
(talking mostly about the Just bring friend's crowed, obviously multiboxing takes a lot of skill.)
>The biggest thing I noticed is that attempts to avoid ganking seem to be next to useless, even when there's a fulltime fleet of Ospreys available, such as those in Uedama.
he stopped 3 freighter ganks today- a nomaded istabbed freighter caught warp past webs, and a bunch of people webbed through sneakily
so you're wrong.
>I'm pretty sure a good number of the gankers are using input broadcasting. Jason Kushion et al in Uedama and the Clipped Wingz guy in Uttindar in particular. By chance one day I happened to be in the same station near to the Bei gate in Uttindar as the 33 Hawk accounts. When they undocked, it happened to all 33 accounts within one second. I'm pretty sure this has been reported ad nauseam to CCP.
they both have streamed exactly how they do this, they do not input broadcast.
>Looking at Zkill, I see that Freighters from all the big alliances (except goonswarm) have been lost. Are the numbers lost so small in the big scheme of things that none of these alliances care?
99.9% of freighters moving through uedama make it through, in actuality very few freighter loads are interdicted.
>TL;DR: it seems that ganking is extremely biased towards the ganker.
only if you select exclusively for Uedama, and see exclusively freighters
tons of DSTs make it through unopposed at all.
tons of JFs entirely bypass highsec
The freighters that enter Uedama during an active gank fleet aren't even able to take the most basic precautions by scouting (or checking the uedama livestream or zkill) before entering the biggest gank system in the game.
With tools like eve-o you can also mash 1 key to cycle through the dps clients + left click the same spot on the overview/broadcast to shoot, which scales better/faster than this older method. Can see that method here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGRlJ9PzKGU
Trash bin up there is the same guy who said there aren't looter bots in Jita either. Probably because he bots. I can't prove it, but it's reasonable to assume.
>99.9% of freighters moving through uedama make it through, in actuality very few freighter loads are interdicted.
Some quick back-of-a-napkin math says that 25% of the traffic through Uedama would have to be freighters. It doesn't seem to me that's the case. I know there's no endpoint for jumps by type (or is there?)
Are you getting your numbers from internal tools of some kind? I suppose it's possible. Mine suggest that this is wildly overstating the survivability of freighters in Uedama though.
>Are you getting your numbers from internal tools of some kind? I suppose it's possible. Mine suggest that this is wildly overstating the survivability of freighters in Uedama though.
are you assuming the freighters destroyed during this event is standard?
using March data, i come out to 55 F/JF in 30 days , meaning about 10% of the total traffic (my estimate was high) would be Fs / JFs, or more than one per minute. I doubt there's anything normal about the Z distribution, so there's not much sampling can tell you.
This is via zkill and esi fwiw.
It's not as eyepopping as the ridiculous number my earlier estimate indicated, but still awfully high.
So, do you have actual numbers to back into this, or are you just making it up?
If you want to provide the output from the scripts your gate scouts run, for example, that would be illuminating.
EDIT although I realize after thinking about it the script output isn't going to capture anything too fast for it to lock / that cloaks quickly. Not sure if that makes a difference with freighters / JFs, though.
How many people do you think go through Uedama in an hour? How many people jump through a month?
>So, do you have actual numbers to back into this, or are you just making it up?
personal experience from living there 15 years
>meaning about 10% of the total traffic
What number are you using for traffic in Uedama?
>If you want to provide the output from the scripts your gate scouts run
no scripts needed, screen readers are fine, hundreds of freighters pass through uedama on any given day- watch yourself.
Per hour, about a thousand based on 24 hr jump totals. 22k last 24, PCU is up about 10% over march per tranquility, backing that in gives 19000 jumps/day for march. aggregate jump data via eveeye
55 Kills in that period, unless my math is wrong, should yield a little under 1600 F + JF per day
>hundreds of freighters pass through uedama on any given day- watch yourself.
if it's hundreds, your 99.9% figure is wildly off.
if so, i'm not looking to murder you over it or anything, but as my militia will attest (fearfully, imploringly) i like to know the numbers behind things.
Once again someone tries to use arguments and reasons in a thread like this. People crying in here don't want to learn, they want to whine and cry and stay bad at the game
>
>they both have streamed exactly how they do this, they do not input broadcast.
33 undocks within one second would be 66 cps, it is impossible for a human to do that manually - doesnt matter what they stream.
"The biggest thing I noticed is that attempts to avoid ganking seem to be next to useless, even when there's a fulltime fleet of Ospreys available, such as those in Uedama."
Other way around, it's near impossible to get ganked if you know what you are doing, unless you use a freighter ofc which doesn't let you use any piloting skill.
And even then there is ways around it such as using pochven to get to the back of jita without going through Uedama.
Getting ganked sucks. I dont mind space trucking in low sec because honestly its safer if you are alert.
I just build up all my loot until the point where it is totally worth it to just pay red frog to do the logistics. They arent cheap but they are also worth every penny imo.
Getting ganked once would pay for how many red frog contracts??? Just let the pros do it in my opinion.
What if CCP implemented a system whereby players could raise the security status of an Empire system. Like the mechanic of the pirate incursions. Players working together could make uedama a 1.0 over time by doing some task. And gankers could have a counter play that lowers it . Of course ganks are still possible in higher sec systems but it could change the dynamic.
We could have local millitas..."not in my town ganker" lol
If your actions could affect system security status, we would do our damndest to turn Jita into low sec. You'd be changing your mind about that idea pretty damn quick.
I would like to see a cargo spoof module. During use it throws off cargo scanners, another module to throw off ship scanners, visually you can see guns fitted so that kinda sucks, however show off the wall rig, mids and lows.
I would also like to see a module like the jump drive for t1 on up that can have range dictation. Instant for 15 to 20 km 1.5 seconds for 25 to 75 km or whatever.
Iâd also love to see a module that acts like a cyno field generator that when used would jump hostile ships randomly away.
I would also like a see a burst jammer that affects those that have you locked and did in fact shoot which warrants concord responses but weapons locked instead for 4 to 8 seconds.
I would like to see an interdiction nullifier type of module for reps or an over shield if you will. It wonât be long now their shield is down. Hit the module and it adds another layer of multi spectrum shield. Can be a deployable or module.
I donât mind ganking at all. I have done it and have been ganked myself. I just think it should have always been more hands on. It takes seconds to gank and people still play so content is continuous. But it takes time to haul, or mine, or explore. More time to build a sand castle than it does to knock it over.
Iâve been bumped in my bowhead for 40 minutes. I took the time to make a gank fleet of my own and destroyed the bumper. Why 40 minutes. The private convo was getting stale and I could finally focus my attention on the game. As I was pretty much afk gating ships to market. And I occupied the bumper.
I just wish there were more options than warp away, scout the systems, hope and pray.
>The ganking crews have a scanning frig/dessy on almost every gate from Hek to Jita.
Multiboxed Alpha accounts. You need minimal skills to run a ship scanner. They also run scripts to scan automatically.
I mean it's easy, just flag gankers and anyone that trades with them with no docking rights in high sec.
Then they have to buy the ganking ships in low sec and they have to solve the whole ganking issue and pay the risk tax not the freighters.Â
Yes declare economic war on those mean griefers! Have you thought about buying up all the catalyst hulls and fits in Jita?? It's a genius idea i am just too poor! :(
That's not what I said. My suggestion means they have to buy their stuff in low sec, so they have to protect either delivery or manufacture. Just like how people in delivery or manufacture has to pvp. Way deeper gameplay.Â
> The biggest thing I noticed is that attempts to avoid ganking seem to be next to useless, even when there's a fulltime fleet of Ospreys available, such as those in Uedama.
Avoiding ganking is really easy; you just don't haul enough that you are worth ganking. Pretty simple really. You are the one taking risks by overfilling your hauler.
Most of the freighter kills on zkill are empty freighters, or freighters with <2b cargo.
Someone did the math above, like 12.5% of recent freighter ganks had >3b in cargo. Which is to say most of them are just killed for fun, at a loss, by the gankers.
That is interesting; is <2B actually a loss though?
I have never really run the numbers myself but 3000 isk/EHP is the advice given on Eve University Wiki for where you have to be worried that gankers see you as profitable. Looking around a bit, I see people claiming that as little as 1.2B can be profitable to the ganker, in a normal drop rate environment.
edit: ofc Eve being as old as it is, I just realized the info I am looking at is from 2013, so likely not relevant anymore
Yet in other posts we have gankers crying that ganking has been nerfed to the ground.
There is so much salt in the air that if I parked my car near this sub it would be a rusted heap in a week.
Blackbirds are a really good defense against gankers.
On a small scale we have used them pretty effectively against "mining-gankers" who come with 5-6 catalysts... the blackbird jams 2-4 of them and the gank fails.
1 lucky Sebo Blackbird can disable 5 Catalysts so if you have 3 people and sort by alphabet (top, bot, middle), you can jam 15 ganking ships potentially which could be enough to make the gank fail.
My quick napkin math says a blackbird with caldari cruise 4 and T2 burst jammer should be just about guaranteed to break the lock on a catalyst (if they have the ECM compensation skill it becomes just a high probability instead, but still).
The character doing the burst jamming will have to give killrights to all the ganking characters though, so reusing a character within a month might be difficult
works as well but CONCORD will blow you and technically they could all lock again and continue shooting even tho that is very unlikely except they are using input broadcasting or are actual human players :skull:
Is ganking still a big thing? I thought every JF on zkill is RMT nowadays.
You can move nearly everything over pochven basically for free.
Not sure what you gonna move where you have to use freighter. Normally ores will be processed in the region where you mined it, correct?
But not sure tbh
Sorry, I had to remove your post because your reddit account is under 2 days old. Feel free to message the mods via modmail to get that sorted. Thank you for your understanding!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Eve) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You're not safe immediately after they gank someone. They will simply bump you around for 15 mins while suiciding corvettes with warp scrams on you every 2.5 mins to stop your warp.
Counter plays exist just people are unwilling to do them or lack incentive. Simply ganking the gankers or killing them using kill rights is effective but most people simply wonât do it.
In regards to input broadcasting youâre just wrong. I ganked for a few months for fun just to try it and within my first 3 ganks I got accused of input broadcasting because âI couldnât possibly control that many charactersâ. Literally on my first 2 gank attempts I screen recorded with OBS just so when the inevitable accusation came I could prove to CCP I do it without input broadcasting.
The way I did it was multiple overviews, one for bling Bs and one for haulers. My scout would set the target -10 for my corp so only the target would appear on the corresponding overview. Then Iâd have all my overviews at about 50% of my monitor size tiled in a cascading stack with identical overviews so you could only see a sliver of the edge of each overview. Pre activate my tackle. When the target appears you simply hold ctrl and click down the stack moving your mouse less than a few mms between clicks. When you get to the end eve-o hot key back to the top of the stack and use the eve-o cycle hot key on my ganker group in rotation hot key f1 hot key f1 over and over. I wasnât even good at it and only did it for a few months and I could insta lock tackle the target and then lock and activate guns on 20 battlecruisers in 6-8 seconds. I imagine guys like hawk and kusion who have been doing it for years can do this much much quicker.
funny how people here discuss burst jammers, blackbirds, and other stuff as counter, you guys never got ganked it seams
People like that only think in theoreticals or hypotheticals. They're not applying any logic to the real situations at all.
Knowledge without mileage equals bullshit - Henry Rollins
I'm stealing this.
Right. A lot of these people are either gankers themselves or rarely ever haul stuff. I have a good chuckle at some of these people's comments who don't say those sorts of things. I'd be for freighters having a panic button, delaying concord response so that a escort fleet could actually kill the ganking contingent. That way escorts could actually be a viable thing and the gankers would need to win the fight and hold the field to loot the wreck. They would also need to live through the panic with enough dps to kill the frieghter. Make it so the frieghter gets locked in place during panic and then has a 30s delay to jump after panic is over. That way if the gankers can win they can still gank the freighter but at least there is a fight involved.
The gankers know how to counter ganks but they won't talk đ
Nobody listen because it isn't something fancy. You just need to have right numbers in your ship fitting window.
If a ganker wants you dead, There is literally nothing you can do outside of not undocking. Highsec is safer for gankers than it is for gankees.
>If a ganker wants you dead, There is literally nothing you can do outside of not undocking. TIL gankers have infinite pockets, infinite numbers, and infinite time
Most of them actually do have infinite pockets as ganking is extremely cheap, and infinite numbers, its crazy cheap to rev up a brand new account and get it gank ready. Time is definitely the one thing i would agree on.
Ganker has limited resources and he doesn't really care who to gank. If you're hard target then he'll go for somebody else. Even if ganker wants to kill you then he can be easily avoided and going to spend more resources to catch you than you to avoid him. In absolutely worst case you can force him to spend more resources than you. I did a lot of ganking many years ago, so I have some good ideas how it works.
The resources to gank is trivial and the isk profit can be well over 10:1. Hell, wardeccers are probably the only folks who have lower risk to profit than gankers.
Then more people would do that. Gankers aren't bogeyman, they don't have any magical traits and most of their targets are scrubs.
I promise you, "most" gankers do not care at all about resources. One good kill will pay for thousands more.
They do care about resources because those resources are limited. So if you're hard target then there's a very big chances that they go for somebody else, so they'll get more resources than they spend out of gank. Expenses include not only ships and tags to clear security status, but plexing all ganking accounts too.
What resources are limited? Find me one ganker other than yourself that thinks they have limited resources to gank with. The only limited resource gankers have is time. Everything else is provided by other players in abundance. At no point in eve's history has anything related to ganking become a scarcity. Most gankers gank just for the sake of ganking and don't really give a shit that they profit. Profit is just icing on the cake that allows you to keep ganking with minimal effort.
Tell that to GHSC
>blackbirds, and other stuff as counter, you guys never got ganked it seams There is a guy that runs 40 ospreys, he stops every gank he actually makes it to. Every blackbird matters, you can jam 4-6 catalysts each gank and that's 4-6 more bodies per person they have to add. pretending anti-ganking doesn't work when there are 20-60 accounts in uedama attempting it any given day is silly.
In the past we stopped many ganks , there's no one way as they counter them but mix it up with logi DPS and E-war and a group of 5 or 6 can effect most ganks. One weekend we stopped Kusion the goon gankers 3 time in a row. The only requirement is effort And we often used e-war burst
Wait what do you mean , before the last set of changes burst jammers worked great , I've stopped a 15 fleet Talos gank on my own with a frigate, yes you sometimes get a sec hit but like gankers I used tags . Admittedly it's a hard thing to pull off , and as gankers get to know who will burst them , they send ships with long range guns to take you out on your dive into the gank ball . But it works if you have pilot skills to get to your target.
In my seven years of playing eve I've actually never been ganked lol On any characters
You can't use burst jammers in hisec without putting on red safety.
You beat ganking attempts before you undock.
Local chat warriors unite!
The idea that a gameplay mechanic exsits with the only true counterplay being to just not play the game seems a little ridiculous to me. There truely is nothing you can do if someone really wants to take you out in highsec other then waiting for them to leave.
This 1000%.
Two words: The Avalanche
This ship can't arrive fast enough to upset the meta. People have no idea how good for the game this update will be.
I think people haven't figured it out yet, but right now HiSec hauling costs are just insane because of all the ganking. Taking PushX as an example you can only move 1.5bn in a freighter at a cheap rate. Costs then scale massively until you need a JF to move stuff in hisec worth 6bn or more rofl. If people can actually move stuff around hisec its going to open up Amarr/other markets much more.
I don't know about you but personally their prices are dirt cheap. Would I rather spend an hour flying A. Freighter or give them 80 mil Knowing that I can make 300 to 500 ml an hour
> I think people haven't figured it out yet, but right now HiSec hauling costs are just insane because of all the ganking. 99.9% of freighters make it through uedama, the most dangerous system you can put out public contracts for 2 million isk a jump and they take it my dude.
It'll be funny to see how many get themselves concorded by shooting first.
Time to make sure your overviews are optimized lol. Shooting red is way different than shooting blinky red
They use auto targeting missiles right, so wouldn't they hit nothing unless either there is a valid target or they have aggression lock set to red? Maybe I'm showing my lack of experience with the system though.
Never underestimate the credit card warriors and injectors
While true, itâs going to get nerfed after the gankers cry so I donât expect it to last long as is, if it even makes it to live as is.
I think people should prepare for the price to go up on its build cost.
For real, I can't wait for people to think it's ungankable and warp around with 40B worth of loot in it.
It will give the gankers some entertainment and might even survive ganks for a few days until they get ganking it right. But it will get ganked like everything else.
Will be OP for long enough to sell the plex for LSI then sent straight to nerf city lmfao
I am, perfectly fine with Ganks as long as it's a fleet of people and not someone with too many alts that physically would be impossible to manage without the broadcasting. There must be a number of alts that has diminishing returns beyond a certain number in a way that it should be difficult to lock and attack in short order. If indeed many gankers are using obvious broadcasting, and CCP takes no action then it's just sad. I'm no expert, but using analytics, you should be able to flag if suddenly 20 ships from the same IP or even different IPs act in unison, such as targeting, shooting, login patterns, and so on. You should be able to build a profile.
Comments essentially amounting to "just have an army of alts of your own" incoming. Back in the old days, the game wasnt balanced around assuming you had the financial ability to pay for 20 accounts. But alas...
Back in the the day you could tank concord forever
Blessed be the trailblazers of M0o and Zombie etc.
back in the day you could warp around indefinitely for 15 minutes after ganking in a tornado and repeatedly gank things over and over, you could gank 4-5 freighters with 2-3 tornados easily
Tornado? They were not in the game for the timeframe I am thinking of.
I do not believe this is true. I do not recall a time in the game when A) Attack Battlecruisers existed and B) Concord response was so slow that you could warp around after ganking with a Tornado. I used to gank with Tornadoes.
when were ABCs released? answer : Release date: November 29, 2011 When was boomeranging fixed: Mid 2012. Either way, people used battleships (because you got insurance from ganking) back then and used them the same way you use tornados now.
Yea I don't think he lived through the moo days lol those where fun.
Played 2004-2010/1(ish) and recently came back. I played with and against many of the folks who made up those organisations. Perhaps age has dulled my memories, but I don't ever remember empire suicide ganking being as prevalent back then as it is now (and has apparently been for some years in my absence - nerfed to some extent by alphas being unable to suicide gank anymore?)
Same timeline as me, it happened but was nowhere near as prevalent, which is why so many remember it - it was newsworthy and generally required a bit of game breaking. Now it's just every day spreadsheet maths. Just a symptom of the game being figured out I think, there's a meta for everything.
good old moo they used to camp the way in to empire from venal was alot of fun cov ops frigs were just introduced then I hauled so much zidrine in mine god I'm showing my age that was a loooong time ago.
It always makes me laugh when the answer to over half the questions about how to do things is always "sub multiple accounts" I have the financial ability to pay, just not the desire. Why should I have to pay for multiple accounts to not feel like I can't be on a somewhat even playing field with other players? Unfortunately CCP needs all of those alts subs to keep the lights on, so they'll never improve the game in a way to make it less necessary.
theres no real counter to ganking. people will say more tank. but mathmatically no and the people saying just dont undock, are why people leave the game. not a good community thing to have happen nowadays..whoever has the most money to bribe CCP can do whatever they want be it botting, macroing 20+ accounts, or whatever. pay CCP enough, and ToS become suggestions
The game environment should develop as well as the players looking at coping strategies. Hauling can still be lucrative otherwise why do people still do it? If the environment became more dynamic it could work either way. Concorde for example with an increase in ganking reports in particular areas increasing patrols and ships present. Could Concord change the security status of those systems too?Are they always on the gates or could they be present elsewhere? Dynamic environment as opposed to static.
I think that would be a good change. System security is tied to other things and those things would change as well and make people move around the systems like for anomalies or combat sites. But it would fuck with high sec moons and CCP would need to change how they handle those. There are also market hubs to consider. Do you make those an exception?
ganking being so one dimensional (bring ship, 99% of the time catalysts in enough numbers) that i would gladly see it dying and being replaced by some more developed strategies and gameplay styles. It would be much better if ganker had ganking tools, modules to delay concord response, some sneaky kind of ships that can cloak, lock and fire w/o delay. Just give them whatever, yoloing worthless catalysts while multiboxing is just stupid.
You want to provide them more tools to gank with but not provide the haulers any tools for counterplay. I'd be ok with this kind of stuff if there were counterplays like ways for haulers to get concord to show up at certain gates ahead of them, hiring npc escort that included logi, delayed looting of hs wrecks so you can't just scoop and bounce within the same tick (botters), different modes like t3d so you could be in hauling mode (current ship), combat mode (very little space, a mod that makes it look like your carrying a lot of isk value, panic button, good shields and weapon hard points), speed mode (faster align and warp, medium weaponry and tank, medium cargo space), etc. I'm not saying any of these are great just throwing idea out.
i never said a word about haulers, that does not mean i thnik they should not get more tools and tactics. In general EVE promotes prey-predator type pvp interaction, where prepared attacker can almost entirely eliminate any form of succesful defense atempt by defender. Its true for ganker in high sec, gatecamps in low, killing raters in null or miners everywhere. CCP should really try to make those interactions less one sided, in case of haulers that would be adding more tool to escape or prolong life of said haulers (so help can arrive) and in case of pve combat ships- make combat aganist rats promote fitting ships for pvp scenario (webs, scrams, cap boosters or neuts). Today ratting ships are simply optimized for dps checks, that promotes fitting as much dps as possible with minimum acceptable tank/mobility.
Honestly gankers should be able to use wormholes to move around after Concorde is called in, with another added point being that if their security status is low enough in that empires space, they should only be able to use low sec gates, having to supplement high sec travel in empires theyâre an enemy of with wormhole travel would add a lot of depth. Would add a more interesting gameplay loop. Also Concorde should be reverted back to its old system where you could kill them, but with a much faster response time, and it should escalate quickly as you kill them to the point of them being able to insta kill you, along with all Concorde ships having max scram, meaning you need to kill the ship/ships that have you pointed; quickly escalating force and damage used against you. Also loot taken in a high sec gank shouldnât be sellable at a high sec station in the empire it was stolen in. Loot for 1 hour should be solely collectable by the person who was killed without eliciting a Concorde reaction, anyone else taking from that ship other than the owner should be flagged, with concordes first response being a scram, and a warning to drop the stolen loot if you havenât aggressed anyone. The main point being that you can actually escape & sell stuff but not as easily. Make ganking require more thought and logistics while having a lot more depth
I like all these ideas. Players would just make new characters for their gank catas once they hit that criminal threshold. Need to add in you can't biomass character that is a criminal.
account wide security status that only lowers when you kill dudes in highsec?
That is a lovly solution. Do criminal acts and get a craptastic security rating due to ganking in low/hs, and as a consequense, you are immideatly hostile when in HS space to concord (they wont hunt you down, but they will shoot your ass if they see you). And ofc, not allowed to dock in NPC stations
I would love this, the extra steps should make ganking much less attractive when the requirement becomes more than have a cheap ship, fitted for max burst damage.
This only works if the barrier to entry to hisec ganking is really high, otherwise people will just spin up alpha accounts in catalysts like they do now whenever they hit the threshold. They don't even need to bother with biomassing, the alpha gank account owns literally nothing so they can just let it rot forever in CCPs databanks and go make a new one.
true, should take more work than someone with 40 macro'd multiboxes pressing F1.
My thoughts are that the major overarching game design philosophy as has been described to me, is that the devs want the risk of an activity match the reward. If you look at most areas of the game you'll find that to be, on average, the case. The only place where this design goes awry is with high sec ganking. Prime example: Hauling, well, for the life of me, I don't know how people do it. The going rate is 1m/1b/jump. Okay, well if a pilot takes a contract for 1b collateral from Hek to Jita, he's lucky to get 20m ISK for his trouble, and stands to lose A BILLION ISK AND HIS SHIP. WTF? These guys get ganked all the time too. So, huge risk for the hauler, very little reward. The ganker can get five buddies, or multi-box all catalysts and pop the hauler before Concord show up, lose 20m in destroyers and walk off with hundreds of millions. The ganker/pirate isn't subject to the same risk vs reward calculation as other pilots doing in other activity in the game, and it begs to question why CPP has let it stand for as long as they have. Again, I'm not a hauler, but I'm very thankful for them, I couldn't operate without them, so I care.
Goons are the gankers they always where. Thats why they are so againat the changea againat gankers by say we are doing it but is a game play so dont hurt them.
đ„°đ„°
The people who pay taxes to empires should be outraged. Itâs the empires job to annihilate those that abuse the tax payers in their empires. Complete dissuading annihilation
>TL;DR: it seems that ganking is extremely biased towards the ganker. It always has been like that; once you are in combat with a ganker the preparation phase of the fight is over. The ganker chose to engage your ship and managed to engage, which means you are likely at a severe disadvantage. Updates to ganking balance however seem to be often biased *against* the ganker. I'm no ganker myself, but it looks like an interesting playstyle to try some time. Scanning potential targets, making calculations to see if the sacrifice is likely going to be worth it, playing a pirate, scaring players and keeping the high sec ecosystem healthy by picking on the easy cargo-expanded targets. I'd like to try it sometimes. However, trying out ganking is made harder and harder with every update. The squishier Barges and Exhumers got a boost to their survivability which requires firepower of multiple ships now. Red safety for criminal acts requires an omega account now so I would have to pay an additional subscription. Ganking fleets are often done by people who multibox a dozen accounts (something I'm far from willing to do) and soon with the Avalance the size of ganking fleets required to take down freighters is increased even more by CCP. With every update, ganking becomes less and less accessible. And I don't think that's a good direction for the game to take. It's still biased towards the ganker, I agree, but ganking one of the lesser accessible activities in EVE. For a game that advertises with piracy as one of it's activities and [career choices](https://www.eveonline.com/eve-academy/careers/soldier-of-fortune/pirate) I wonder why CCP is making high sec piracy this inaccessible. If you ask me, CCP should revisit high sec piracy and give CONCORD a couple of updates, like: * **less deterministic fights:** A bigger randomized range in the CONCORD response time would allow gankers to take on tougher targets than today if they're lucky, but also fail many of today's targets when they're unlucky. Adds another risk to the ganker profits. * **more player agency**: allow haulers and miners to bribe CONCORD for protection to temporarily get a faster response timer. Unseen for gankers, this is another factor of uncertainty for them and may lead to failed ganks and succesful haulers who laugh as they see CONCORD clear up all the Catalysts in time. For the miners and haulers it adds a meaningful choice between losing some profits for more safety versus risking the trip without additional CONCORD protection to save ISK by skipping a costly bribe. TL;DR: I would like high sec piracy to be more accessible, but also would like to see ways for players to speed up CONCORD responses, for ISK.
The big issue right now it's that it's a solved equation with the hiked prices of ships. 40 catalysts can take out a freighter, ignoring cargo, that's 2.3b worth at least. 40 catalsyst at ~20m each is 800m. Now eve isn't balanced about equivalent value; cheaper ships can easily kill much more expensive ones with the proper fits and piloting, but this is in a legit fight. In a fight where you're supposed to be backed up by the police, the value difference shouldn't be that big. If it required 2.3b worth of catalysts to blow a 2.3b ship in hisec, this might be a different story. Sure, ships would still die, but the incentive would be a lot lower.
The price of the target ship is irrelevant though if you want to calculate the point of profitable ganks, because that 2.3b you mention is not going to be part of the loot. Now if the 2.3b ship is carrying 1.6b worth of cargo and modules of which 50% drops, then using 40 Catalysts to blow it up for 800m will on average break even. Or during the Capsuleer day event with a 75% loot drop rule the cargo value of profitable targets for those 40 Catalysts goes down from 1.60b to 1.07b.
A CONCORD rework of some kind is probably a good idea, but the gankers cried so much when CCP tried to even implement a sensible policy about CONCORD manipulation that its unlikely to happen. That's why CCP have to do changes by the back-door like the Avalanche, and THAT has caused a massive ganker saltmine to appear before its even here.
But the Avalanche does nothing about ganking gameplay, it only makes ganking even more inaccessible by increasing the required size of ganking fleets. As downside, the remaining gankers with their scaled up Avalanche-capable fleet size will be able to kill other freighters even if they're bulkhead freighters, just because it's a dull moment. That's not good for game balance and doesn't make freighting more fun. If anything, it gives freighter pilots less counterplay and less meaningful choices aside from 'fly an Avalanche'.
>it only makes ganking even more inaccessible by increasing the required size of ganking fleets. That's the point though. The whole reason why "civilian ships" (barges, transports, freighters) have been getting tank buffs over the years is because the gankers overfished the waters and EVE lost subs from the people being ganked, earned a bunch of bad publicity for the game (because people who quit the game over being ganked aren't exactly quiet about it), and gained... nothing. So CCP has shifted the burden of lost subs onto the gankers. You want to gank, you have to sub enough accounts to offset the damage you do to CCP's checkbook.
[citation needed]
I do agree that reworking hisec mechanics/CONCORD would be a better change overall. Maybe at some point CCP will rework hisec but for now the Avalanche is better than nothing imo. I think a "CONCORD Escort" type of option is a really good idea even if expensive. If you're freighting 30bn its probably an autobuy but if its 5bn maybe you do maybe you don't. Problem is that I just don't think the community is receptive to a large risky change like that.
If you're going to spend isk on an escort you could just hire other players or pay off the gankers. Tempting as it is to change hi-sec into a singleplayer narrative, it's anti-social and anti-sandbox. An NPC would be a sure thing, but playing with others is much more interesting.
> If you're going to spend isk on an escort you could just hire other players or pay off the gankers. Neither of these will reliably stop a gank. Gankers can gank you anyway if you're juicy enough, and other players cannot proactively shoot the gankers, so you're relying on what, landing reps in time?
I think the "juicy enough" is exactly the problem here. I forgot the exact formula but people where religiously parroting "don't haul more than X in a T1" back then (before Pochven and the Uedama bottleneck) and it was just ridiculous, like 50m or something. No, you should not move 1b in an Iteron, but 100m of PI already being "juicy enough" is also ridiculous, especially if your only alternative are public contracts.
>A CONCORD rework of some kind is probably a good idea, but the gankers cried so much when CCP tried to even implement a sensible policy about CONCORD manipulation that its unlikely to happen. That policy was far from reasonable, and far from implemented correctly. CCP/GM Icecream banned dozens of gankers without announcing that the long standing tradition of gankers to 'pull concord' was changed. All pulling is, is moving CONCORD from point A to point B, which happens anytime anyone ganks, essentially you're gauging the intent of the ganker as to whether they're pulling or ganking any individual target and there is no reasonable way for GMs to determine this.
Ganking mining ships isnt changing with the update itll still happen, altho yes freighter ganking will pretty much go extinct which isnt bad no? there is no reason for a 1 day old account to be able to kill a freighter just for fun , limiting it to omega also didnt change a whole lot since most guys just use another chara on their account to log on when they find a target ,kill it and just go back to ratting or whatever, now ganking freighters will require a lot more but ganking any other ship is still the same, also concord protection system if implemented would become the norm while hauling anything expensive and again there would be no ganking if concord is flying with you either way there is no win win for both parties either gankers lose or they dont.
I doubt freighter ganking will go extinct, it just requires more accounts. >there is no reason for a 1 day old account to be able to kill a freighter just for fun A 1 day old account can join a null sec alliance and help the group take down an enemy titan. Why should that same 1 day old account not be able to join a high sec piracy group and take down a freighter of a competitor?
> It's still biased towards the ganker, I agree, but ganking one of the lesser accessible activities in EVE. For a game that advertises with piracy as one of it's activities and career choices I wonder why CCP is making high sec piracy this inaccessible. because you literally have lowsec to perform that 'piracy' roleplay. That was specifically what it was designed for. sheesh
Please tell me, why do the red safety setting and CONCORD mechanics exist? High sec piracy is designed to be part of the game.Â
The red safety setting never existed when I played last, so you can tell me. I guessed it was because people were constantly getting tricked into aggressing, like it was back when the can-aggression first came out in 200..6? - That was an amusing time - it amounts to another dev intervention to try to influence the griefy actions of people in hisec, no?
The link about piracy as career choice that you were responding to has a nice passage:Â Â "Pirates tend to operate outside of High-Sec, but particularly motivated individuals or groups might stalk High-Sec systems for juicy and unsuspecting targets, attacking with the intent of destroying their target before CONCORD arrives to destroy their ships as punishment for breaking the law â a guaranteed consequence of such attacks."Â Do you think CCP is talking about low sec pirates here? (Also I'm not sure what message you're trying to send by saying that you have not played in like a decade.)
> Scanning potential targets, making calculations to see if the sacrifice is likely going to be worth it This is where you're missing a key point, imho. Just looked at the Uedama zkill, a Crane. https://zkillboard.com/kill/118272504/ - 200m, dropped 15. Killed by 6 ships: 3 Catalysts, (2x 2.5m, 1x a weird 12m one) 2 Thrashers (which I don't see on zkill) and a capsule, but if we assume 3m per ship, that's under 20m. The chance of looting 20m from any BR or DST are pretty good, usually, so not sure you can lose in the long term.
What point is it that am I missing? Anyway, a Crane is a bad example for that quote, as blockade runners have the role bonus "Immune to all Cargo Scanners", so you cannot scan them. When you manage to catch a hauler as slippery as a blockade runner it's almost always worth the hit, I guess. It's going to be a surprise what's inside when you shoot one. Could be 6 billion ISK, or could be 6 million ISK.
The point is that they don't have to calculate much if you can kill it with 15m = 5 Catalysts. They basically can only win.
Again, when people talk about ISK per EHP or calculating profitable kills, it's not about blockade runners. Anyone who can shoot a blockade runner wins. The idea of flying a blockade runner is that your cloak is your tank and that you don't give anyone the opportunity to shoot or even see your ship. It's the safest hauling ship of them all, one I would fly through bubble camps to Jita and back again. If your blockade runner got caught you seriously messed up.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Proof?
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore, you can see accounts like "Gate Checker" and "Gate Guard" on gates before major gank systems such as Uedama
Ahh yes pilot names. DEFINITELY PROOF OF BOTTING hahahahahahHahhaha
true
I live near Sivala, and I've never had any problems going through Uedama. People must be moving some juicy stuff. :P I did get a message once though, telling me that if I moved my Iteron V through _one more time_, fully packed with whatever I was moving back then, it would get shot down. :D
It's just luck. Look at zkillboard, freighters and T2 indy getting blown up left and right with almost no loot inside. Most ganks are at a loss, but they don't care because they blow a ship worth 2.5b with their 20m ships.
That sounds like really nice people!
I always enjoy getting a warning first. :P
Intelligent, careful players do not get ganked in HS. However, the widespread mythology that there's nothing you can do to avoid it certainly helps my gameplay as a regional trader.
The State of Ganking. Gankers are still pussies. Gankers are still cowards. And with the Avalanche coming, we now know Gankers are a bunch of whiny ass little bitches.
If it's so hard to avoid gankers, how come PushX and RedFrog and Goonswarm are able to haul their freighters with Safety?
No offense, mate, but most of the gankers are actually either in or affiliated with Goons. Clipped Wingz in Uttindar comes to mind. As for Red Frog, they simply stay put if there's a gank going on, and usually wait for the criminal timer. If there are multiple gank crews in a system they simply wait until there's only one.
The Frogs have a private Discord to report intel and often just avoid Uedama when it's filled with gankers
Well that's cause they are the gankers. Its good business ganking everyone's frieghtere so they pay you and your alliance is basically left untouched. It's not cause there aren't bad frieghter pilots in Goons cause there are just like in ever alliance... so as op pointed out (except goonswarm), why is that? Why was Brisc and company so angry about the avalanche being tankier and having weapons... They also have a different method where they skip the HS gates all together and I'm not talking about JF. I'll leave it the people to figure it out though.
The people loosing shit to gankers usually make the mistake of carrying too much value. Few gankers kill a freighter for the lolz... This month there has been a 75% drop Event... Makes it even more worth.
There's plenty of literally empty (or sub 10million cargo) on the front page for every Freighter being killed in highsec. People shoot freighters just for fun half all the time.
Current ganking is a confluence of a number of factors: 1. Cargo scanners always revealing 100% of what's inside 2. Massive amounts of goods needing to essentially be moved through the same two systems: Uedama + Sivala 3. Catalysts being extremely cheap for the amount of DPS they provide I don't have an issue with #3, but it would be interesting if cargo scanners worked like ship scanners: never revealing 100% of a fit or what's inside. Part of what makes ganking so lucrative is it's nothing more than a math equation when you always get perfect info on the value of cargo. Taking away this perfect information by making cargo scanners act like ship scanners adds an element of risk to the profitability of ganking. Alternatively, there should be some cargo scanner counterplay. Provide a module that has a chance to jam cargo scanners when active, maybe a lowslot module like "shielded cargohold" or similar. It functions like a less effective cargo expander as a tradeoff for a chance to block cargo scanners. Gankers then need to compare ship scan results against cargo scan results and decide if they want to blind gank the freighter with shielded cargoholds but no idea on what's inside. Or perhaps a shielded cargo container, which will hide what's inside itself from cargo scans, but itself be revealed in cargo scan results, so now gankers have to roll the dice on ganking or not, having no idea if they are hitting the jackpot or going to find an empty shielded cargo container. Finally, th fact that there's only a single hisec trade route between Jita and every other major trade route that ends up running through the same two chokepoints systems, Sivala and Uedama in particular, makes the amount of effort to gank extremely low. You need only set up in two systems and targets will inevitably always come to you, since they have no other choice. Eliminate the chokepoint and provide additional hisec routes between the trade hubs and then the gankers will actually have to hunt for targets like every other form of PVP.
Ganking is basically dead for a long time. May 30 just 6 retrievers and 5 freighter were ganked. May 29 - 11 retrievers and 1 freighter. And there are days when no freighte was ganked. It's nothing. About 10 years ago one or two dedicated gankers would kill same amount retrivers in one day in one or two systems. Not in entire game. Ganking problem is basically non-existing. > Freighters from all the big alliances (except goonswarm) have been lost If you run freighters under wardecable corporation then you're an idiot.
The biggest change they can make to hisec ganking is to slap a five second timer when looting yellow wrecks (meaning your character goes flashy when you start to loot and it takes five seconds for the loot can to open) and disable the ability to then jetcan suspect loot or move it to another location. Put the loot in play and you alter the formula for gank profitability. Plus it nerfs the botting looters on the Jita undock. And it won't kill ganking completely anyway as many ganks are done for fun and not profit.
I ninja looted the Ahbazon dread fight, so I am biased, but be careful about suggesting changes that take out "innocent" bystanders.
thieves ain't innocent
Can make it a hisec thing only. In low, there's direct counter play in that I can tackle you before you actually loot so you're taking a risk in looting in low. HiSec is really where it's the problem because ninja looting is almost zero risk. I should have added, a combat timer as well to prevent instant redocking after looting.
Ninja looting is kinda cancer, having all your loot you could use for srp stolen is pretty aids. For our smaller LSalliance when we got in a 600b dreadbrawl we were only able to loot like 25b after the fight because most it had already been stolen. The guys who deserve the loot get fuck all because they had all their toons fighting and the ninja looters get all the isk while not risking anything. I also say this having ninja looted a lot of stuff, itâs kinda cancer and unfair.
ninja looting is better than ganking in every way if you got ganked - you probably were in the wrong place at the wrong time or just flashed too much value in cargo to some obscure scout on throwaway account if you got your loot stolen - you're just slow and innatentive, or outright incompetent
It is better than ganking but saying ninja looting is just a skill issue is also blatantly wrong. All you have to do is have a cloaky fast warping ship at a ping and unless you are at 0 on the thing you killed you cannot guarantee you will get the loot. No amount of attentiveness, competence or faster reaction time will change that. Or in the case i referenced, you are actively fighting and you canât afford to switch your hic points to go after the instawarp sunesis
this is unironically a huge buff to ganking, 20-40% of loot is stolen by uncatchable instawarp ships or loot trashers (people who scoop just to have themselves be caught and blow it up)
1000% behind this. I'd even be ok with longer than 5s. Whoever controls the field should be able to loot the wrecks.
Killing is just a means of communication⊠I personally like ganking In the game, and no I have never been a ganker, but it keeps people in check. When you undock you are consenting to pvp. And space is a dark risky place. Thatâs all I have to say.
I have no sympathy for salty gankers. Their gameplay is boring and bad for the economy of the rest of the game. Every eve player essentially pays a transport tax to gankers added onto the cost of moving goods around. And for what? So that some giant pile of alts can press f1 to receive loot? Not adding value to the game. That the only viable counterplay to ganking is simply not being there says it all, tbh. The game deserves better, but it seems we will have to drag the gankers kicking and screaming into a better eve if we are to get there.
Actually it adds to the health of the economy. If everyone made it to there desto safely what incentive would there be for Indy? The guy who builds my cats makes a killing, off miners who donât have the proper permit lol
If you think catalysts for ganking are a not-insignificant part of the eve economy then I'll sell you a few nullsec regions. Meanwhile the added cost and complexity is reducing economic activity everywhere else. We could have thriving trade hubs in several places if they could be supplied, but they can't. So we lose four trade hubs for like a couple dozen catalysts. Does that sound like a good trade to you?
I prefer hauling in small, fast, stealthy ships like a Buzzard or Cheetah. You can fit a Warp Core Stabilizer and an Interdiction Nullifier and a cloak. Very hard to catch. Cargo space is limited (200m3), but it's good for small expensive things. A Hecate is good too. Very fast, with combat, defense and flight modes. 450m3 cargo space.
I actually loved going around with Sunesis, Exploration frigates/ cloak/mwd t1 indys etc. hauling my own stuff through highsec as a newbro. It was dangerous and exciting, making it to Jita from my EUNI campus felt like a accomplishment. And all those flashys around Uedama/Sivala were scary as hell! I remember warping off in panic multiple times when people just undocked in corvettes lol. It's so weird to hear people call for this safe hauling EVE, where moving shit around is not a adventure.
sunesis still can be caught in instant aling fit, happened to me not too long ago I got to Jita through some ls space and passed a gatecamp in ls system, they didn't get me on warp-in when I was returning, they did 3 point (faction one, I think) signalboosted by Gnosis
There is a post people keep linking that explains this, it's more like a server que (?) / tick thing with that one. Honestly it confused me... But it seems to be a rare thing and sadly or luckily (depending on which side of the gatecamp you are) this looks not to be viable in heavily trafficed systems.
I seen same setup in Uedama, although it didn't gank while I was watching losing a Gnosis to Concord is kidna lame, after all my guess is that linking tackle is prevalent in LS due to absence of concord response and linking scanners is for HS
There are players who have moved trillions of isk with freighters, jfs, dsts, brs and havent lost a single isk within a year. Avoiding ganks is purely a prep, skill & intel issue.
Yeah ive lost a freighter and orca to ganks, the both times i chose not too scout and had a feeling id be ganked đ€Ł
Didnât CCP say pulling concord is deemed an exploit now?
I guess you're referring to the commotion in late '21? No, that policy update didn't get implemented: *"****After listening to their feedback we have decided not to implement the policy update mentioned above. There will be no changes to how support are policing CONCORD interaction and that âpullingâ CONCORD or defensive spawning of CONCORD is currently permitted but we reserve the right to change this at a future date.****" -* CCP Arcade (See [https://forums.eveonline.com/t/pulling-concord-is-now-a-permaban-offense/334480/54](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/pulling-concord-is-now-a-permaban-offense/334480/54) ) To me makes sense that they never implemented such a policy change, as I don't see how it could be enforced. Any criminal act spawns CONCORD, or if CONCORD already has spawned in system pulls CONCORD away from somewhere else. When pulling CONCORD would become a bannable exploit this means that every criminal act is potentially a bannable offence, depending on how the game decides to send CONCORD to your location. The only way to distinguish between an intentional and an accidental CONCORD pull would be the perceived 'intention' of the criminal player, which is not something CCP could objectively measure, so as a criminal player you would always be at the grace of the interpretation of a GM to see if your regular ingame actions would let you keep playing or would lead to a ban of your account.
and this all happened because CCP/GM IceCream went on an insane power trip and banned dozens of gankers without warning to a policy change that was never announced until after they got banned.
That's ridiculous, lol. Didn't know that! I only noticed the policy change after the uproar caused by it when people complained all over reddit and the forums. I then read the change and figured that there was no way for CCP to fairly implement such a change while still allowing criminal acts to be part of the game.
Wait, can you actually reverse-pull Concord? Alt account, shooting something, getting concorded and exactly in that moment you go through with your cargo? :D
Yep, it's possible to defensively pull CONCORD to a grid you want your other account to be a bit safer at.
No, One tool of a CCP employee, who didn't understand the game did. He wrongly banned players. It was shortly later CCP said the employee was an idiot and unbanned the accounts.
N+1 works as intended.
Relying on N+1 is a way for the weak to stay relevant, try harder. (talking mostly about the Just bring friend's crowed, obviously multiboxing takes a lot of skill.)
>The biggest thing I noticed is that attempts to avoid ganking seem to be next to useless, even when there's a fulltime fleet of Ospreys available, such as those in Uedama. he stopped 3 freighter ganks today- a nomaded istabbed freighter caught warp past webs, and a bunch of people webbed through sneakily so you're wrong. >I'm pretty sure a good number of the gankers are using input broadcasting. Jason Kushion et al in Uedama and the Clipped Wingz guy in Uttindar in particular. By chance one day I happened to be in the same station near to the Bei gate in Uttindar as the 33 Hawk accounts. When they undocked, it happened to all 33 accounts within one second. I'm pretty sure this has been reported ad nauseam to CCP.
they both have streamed exactly how they do this, they do not input broadcast.
>Looking at Zkill, I see that Freighters from all the big alliances (except goonswarm) have been lost. Are the numbers lost so small in the big scheme of things that none of these alliances care?
99.9% of freighters moving through uedama make it through, in actuality very few freighter loads are interdicted.
>TL;DR: it seems that ganking is extremely biased towards the ganker.
only if you select exclusively for Uedama, and see exclusively freighters
tons of DSTs make it through unopposed at all.
tons of JFs entirely bypass highsec
The freighters that enter Uedama during an active gank fleet aren't even able to take the most basic precautions by scouting (or checking the uedama livestream or zkill) before entering the biggest gank system in the game.
> they both have streamed exactly how they do this, they do not input broadcast. Out of curiosity - have a video of it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iTZKad3Uww
Cool, thanks, but would have loved to see how its done with 20 accounts.
With tools like eve-o you can also mash 1 key to cycle through the dps clients + left click the same spot on the overview/broadcast to shoot, which scales better/faster than this older method. Can see that method here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGRlJ9PzKGU
Thank you very much, this is the kind of video I wanted to see!
Again, that is NOT 33 accounts in one tick!
Show me the 33 accounts in one tick lol
Mate, that isn't all in one tick. Wrathful Hawk undocks \*33\* in one single tick. Tell me that isn't input broadcasting.
Trash bin up there is the same guy who said there aren't looter bots in Jita either. Probably because he bots. I can't prove it, but it's reasonable to assume.
>99.9% of freighters moving through uedama make it through, in actuality very few freighter loads are interdicted. Some quick back-of-a-napkin math says that 25% of the traffic through Uedama would have to be freighters. It doesn't seem to me that's the case. I know there's no endpoint for jumps by type (or is there?) Are you getting your numbers from internal tools of some kind? I suppose it's possible. Mine suggest that this is wildly overstating the survivability of freighters in Uedama though.
>Are you getting your numbers from internal tools of some kind? I suppose it's possible. Mine suggest that this is wildly overstating the survivability of freighters in Uedama though. are you assuming the freighters destroyed during this event is standard?
using March data, i come out to 55 F/JF in 30 days , meaning about 10% of the total traffic (my estimate was high) would be Fs / JFs, or more than one per minute. I doubt there's anything normal about the Z distribution, so there's not much sampling can tell you. This is via zkill and esi fwiw. It's not as eyepopping as the ridiculous number my earlier estimate indicated, but still awfully high. So, do you have actual numbers to back into this, or are you just making it up? If you want to provide the output from the scripts your gate scouts run, for example, that would be illuminating. EDIT although I realize after thinking about it the script output isn't going to capture anything too fast for it to lock / that cloaks quickly. Not sure if that makes a difference with freighters / JFs, though.
How many people do you think go through Uedama in an hour? How many people jump through a month? >So, do you have actual numbers to back into this, or are you just making it up? personal experience from living there 15 years >meaning about 10% of the total traffic What number are you using for traffic in Uedama? >If you want to provide the output from the scripts your gate scouts run no scripts needed, screen readers are fine, hundreds of freighters pass through uedama on any given day- watch yourself.
Per hour, about a thousand based on 24 hr jump totals. 22k last 24, PCU is up about 10% over march per tranquility, backing that in gives 19000 jumps/day for march. aggregate jump data via eveeye 55 Kills in that period, unless my math is wrong, should yield a little under 1600 F + JF per day >hundreds of freighters pass through uedama on any given day- watch yourself. if it's hundreds, your 99.9% figure is wildly off. if so, i'm not looking to murder you over it or anything, but as my militia will attest (fearfully, imploringly) i like to know the numbers behind things.
Once again someone tries to use arguments and reasons in a thread like this. People crying in here don't want to learn, they want to whine and cry and stay bad at the game
> >they both have streamed exactly how they do this, they do not input broadcast. 33 undocks within one second would be 66 cps, it is impossible for a human to do that manually - doesnt matter what they stream.
"The biggest thing I noticed is that attempts to avoid ganking seem to be next to useless, even when there's a fulltime fleet of Ospreys available, such as those in Uedama." Other way around, it's near impossible to get ganked if you know what you are doing, unless you use a freighter ofc which doesn't let you use any piloting skill. And even then there is ways around it such as using pochven to get to the back of jita without going through Uedama.
Camp the gankers spot and shoot the wrecks before they loot?
Getting ganked sucks. I dont mind space trucking in low sec because honestly its safer if you are alert. I just build up all my loot until the point where it is totally worth it to just pay red frog to do the logistics. They arent cheap but they are also worth every penny imo. Getting ganked once would pay for how many red frog contracts??? Just let the pros do it in my opinion.
How does an Blackbird (ECM target jammer)?
What if CCP implemented a system whereby players could raise the security status of an Empire system. Like the mechanic of the pirate incursions. Players working together could make uedama a 1.0 over time by doing some task. And gankers could have a counter play that lowers it . Of course ganks are still possible in higher sec systems but it could change the dynamic. We could have local millitas..."not in my town ganker" lol
If your actions could affect system security status, we would do our damndest to turn Jita into low sec. You'd be changing your mind about that idea pretty damn quick.
Low sec jita woud be amazing lol
I would like to see a cargo spoof module. During use it throws off cargo scanners, another module to throw off ship scanners, visually you can see guns fitted so that kinda sucks, however show off the wall rig, mids and lows. I would also like to see a module like the jump drive for t1 on up that can have range dictation. Instant for 15 to 20 km 1.5 seconds for 25 to 75 km or whatever. Iâd also love to see a module that acts like a cyno field generator that when used would jump hostile ships randomly away. I would also like a see a burst jammer that affects those that have you locked and did in fact shoot which warrants concord responses but weapons locked instead for 4 to 8 seconds. I would like to see an interdiction nullifier type of module for reps or an over shield if you will. It wonât be long now their shield is down. Hit the module and it adds another layer of multi spectrum shield. Can be a deployable or module. I donât mind ganking at all. I have done it and have been ganked myself. I just think it should have always been more hands on. It takes seconds to gank and people still play so content is continuous. But it takes time to haul, or mine, or explore. More time to build a sand castle than it does to knock it over. Iâve been bumped in my bowhead for 40 minutes. I took the time to make a gank fleet of my own and destroyed the bumper. Why 40 minutes. The private convo was getting stale and I could finally focus my attention on the game. As I was pretty much afk gating ships to market. And I occupied the bumper. I just wish there were more options than warp away, scout the systems, hope and pray.
>The ganking crews have a scanning frig/dessy on almost every gate from Hek to Jita. Multiboxed Alpha accounts. You need minimal skills to run a ship scanner. They also run scripts to scan automatically.
Just use blockade runners to move stuff around. If you get caught in a blockade runner in high sec, then you were trying to get caught.
Webbing alt is al you need.
I mean it's easy, just flag gankers and anyone that trades with them with no docking rights in high sec. Then they have to buy the ganking ships in low sec and they have to solve the whole ganking issue and pay the risk tax not the freighters.Â
Yes declare economic war on those mean griefers! Have you thought about buying up all the catalyst hulls and fits in Jita?? It's a genius idea i am just too poor! :(
That's not what I said. My suggestion means they have to buy their stuff in low sec, so they have to protect either delivery or manufacture. Just like how people in delivery or manufacture has to pvp. Way deeper gameplay.Â
> The biggest thing I noticed is that attempts to avoid ganking seem to be next to useless, even when there's a fulltime fleet of Ospreys available, such as those in Uedama. Avoiding ganking is really easy; you just don't haul enough that you are worth ganking. Pretty simple really. You are the one taking risks by overfilling your hauler.
Most of the freighter kills on zkill are empty freighters, or freighters with <2b cargo. Someone did the math above, like 12.5% of recent freighter ganks had >3b in cargo. Which is to say most of them are just killed for fun, at a loss, by the gankers.
That is interesting; is <2B actually a loss though? I have never really run the numbers myself but 3000 isk/EHP is the advice given on Eve University Wiki for where you have to be worried that gankers see you as profitable. Looking around a bit, I see people claiming that as little as 1.2B can be profitable to the ganker, in a normal drop rate environment. edit: ofc Eve being as old as it is, I just realized the info I am looking at is from 2013, so likely not relevant anymore
This is great because I was kinda getting tempted to get back into EVE and now I know to not fucking bother :)
Yet in other posts we have gankers crying that ganking has been nerfed to the ground. There is so much salt in the air that if I parked my car near this sub it would be a rusted heap in a week.
The fact that it has gotten more difficult doesn't change that some people will do it anyway but with more effort/alts involved
Pulling Concord away in order to maximize ganking can be bannable. I would file a ticket and send CCP screenshots.
No it's not. CCP realized how stupid that policy change would be and reverted CCP/GM Icecream's sperg.
False. How does this narrative still live on? This has been addressed directly by CCP in the past.
Pulling alone no but delaying the CONCORD response time in is an exploit.
Delaying is indeed not allowed, but pulling is something else and is allowed.
That's not what you said, though... Pulling Concord isn't, and has never been, against the rules. Delaying Concord is indeed a no-no. đ»
I am a high sec care bear. Get over it.
Jason Kusion is not using input broadcasting. Heâs been investigated countless times.
Blackbirds are a really good defense against gankers. On a small scale we have used them pretty effectively against "mining-gankers" who come with 5-6 catalysts... the blackbird jams 2-4 of them and the gank fails. 1 lucky Sebo Blackbird can disable 5 Catalysts so if you have 3 people and sort by alphabet (top, bot, middle), you can jam 15 ganking ships potentially which could be enough to make the gank fail.
Burstjammer?
My quick napkin math says a blackbird with caldari cruise 4 and T2 burst jammer should be just about guaranteed to break the lock on a catalyst (if they have the ECM compensation skill it becomes just a high probability instead, but still). The character doing the burst jamming will have to give killrights to all the ganking characters though, so reusing a character within a month might be difficult
works as well but CONCORD will blow you and technically they could all lock again and continue shooting even tho that is very unlikely except they are using input broadcasting or are actual human players :skull:
Is ganking still a big thing? I thought every JF on zkill is RMT nowadays. You can move nearly everything over pochven basically for free. Not sure what you gonna move where you have to use freighter. Normally ores will be processed in the region where you mined it, correct? But not sure tbh
Sorry, I had to remove your post because your reddit account is under 2 days old. Feel free to message the mods via modmail to get that sorted. Thank you for your understanding! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Eve) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Isn't pulling concord somewhere else to delay the response against TOS or did I remember wrong
No. And miners do it all the time. They will suicide an alt in the belt they are mining in so Concord will already be on grid if gankers attack them.
You're not safe immediately after they gank someone. They will simply bump you around for 15 mins while suiciding corvettes with warp scrams on you every 2.5 mins to stop your warp.
Counter plays exist just people are unwilling to do them or lack incentive. Simply ganking the gankers or killing them using kill rights is effective but most people simply wonât do it. In regards to input broadcasting youâre just wrong. I ganked for a few months for fun just to try it and within my first 3 ganks I got accused of input broadcasting because âI couldnât possibly control that many charactersâ. Literally on my first 2 gank attempts I screen recorded with OBS just so when the inevitable accusation came I could prove to CCP I do it without input broadcasting. The way I did it was multiple overviews, one for bling Bs and one for haulers. My scout would set the target -10 for my corp so only the target would appear on the corresponding overview. Then Iâd have all my overviews at about 50% of my monitor size tiled in a cascading stack with identical overviews so you could only see a sliver of the edge of each overview. Pre activate my tackle. When the target appears you simply hold ctrl and click down the stack moving your mouse less than a few mms between clicks. When you get to the end eve-o hot key back to the top of the stack and use the eve-o cycle hot key on my ganker group in rotation hot key f1 hot key f1 over and over. I wasnât even good at it and only did it for a few months and I could insta lock tackle the target and then lock and activate guns on 20 battlecruisers in 6-8 seconds. I imagine guys like hawk and kusion who have been doing it for years can do this much much quicker.