| Author |
Topic |
Michwich |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:21:00 - [ 31]
Edited by: Michwich on 02/11/2009 20:21:59 Originally by: Lucjan
An Armageddon blew me up for my 8m in cargo...figure that one out : in Jita as well. I was in a Badger.
You should be able to take CONCORD to court though for being useless.
Can I have your assets?
Thats a good Idea. You should be able to at the very leaste demand to know what your tax money is being spent on. Because it definately isnt going into security. Why yes, you can have my assets.  Bend over.  |
Vysnaite
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:23:00 - [ 32]
Successful troll is successful. |
Zeba
Minmatar
Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:23:00 - [ 33]
|
Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:23:00 - [ 34]
Originally by: Michwich
So tell us, wheres the risk sitting at a gate scanning for a profitable suicide gank?
You might be there all day, but only come across people who actually take precautions. Quote:
Why isnt this done in null sec?
Because people there take the necessary precautions — in highsec, people don't and thus beg to be killed. Quote:
Thats right. The weakest link. Concord.
Wrong. The weakest link is you. Quote:
The only thing thats there to protect high security is a brain dead AI bot easily predicatable and as such we have protitable suicide attacks.
Wrong. CONCORD is the second thing — the first is you, who should be smarter than a brain dead AI bot. Quote:
Suicide attacks should never be profitable.
Why not? Quote:
The notion that loosing makes you win is called broken
But you didn't win, did you? You were the loser here. The gankers simply paid the the price for high-sec aggression, and when they won, that investment paid off. And that's all it is: highsec is defined by the fact that aggression comes at a cost, either through a wardec or through the loss of ships and standings. |
Ticod
Minmatar
Dychotomy |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:29:00 - [ 35]
Edited by: Ticod on 02/11/2009 20:29:47 Originally by: Michwich
The weakest link. Concord. The only thing thats there to protect high security is a brain dead AI bot easily predicatable and ...
Concord does not exist to 'protect' - only to punish criminals for their deeds. Once you have undocked you yourself are the only means of true protection. If you are AFK and out in space, then obviously you have no protection. btw your battleclinic made me giggle :D Michwich's combat record: Lifetime kills 0 Lifetime losses 45 |
nafiy gnaw |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:33:00 - [ 36]
|
Michwich |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:34:00 - [ 37]
Edited by: Michwich on 02/11/2009 20:33:58 Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Michwich
So tell us, wheres the risk sitting at a gate scanning for a profitable suicide gank?
You might be there all day, but only come across people who actually take precautions.
Quote:
Why isnt this done in null sec?
Because people there take the necessary precautions — in highsec, people don't and thus beg to be killed.
Quote:
Thats right. The weakest link. Concord.
Wrong. The weakest link is you.
Quote:
The only thing thats there to protect high security is a brain dead AI bot easily predicatable and as such we have protitable suicide attacks.
Wrong. CONCORD is the second thing — the first is you, who should be smarter than a brain dead AI bot.
Quote:
Suicide attacks should never be profitable.
Why not?
Quote:
The notion that loosing makes you win is called broken
But you didn't win, did you? You were the loser here. The gankers simply paid the the price for high-sec aggression, and when they won, that investment paid off. And that's all it is: highsec is defined by the fact that aggression comes at a cost, either through a wardec or through the loss of ships and standings.
Theres not just me, theres 2 sides to this equation. And on the other side there was no risk, its been calculated that there would be none before I was attacked. Risk would be greater variability in whats destroyed and whats not. Risk would be the possibility of someone alerting the authorities that there were known criminals around. Risk would be having a module that defeated cargo scans making the otherside have to guess or gather intelligence. Risk is not hitting the cargo scan button and then firing your high slots. Thats not risk. |
Volir
Space Bushido
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:34:00 - [ 38]
Originally by: Michwich
Edited by: Michwich on 02/11/2009 20:16:54
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Michwich
Im not blaming the gankers. Im blaming CCP design decision to allow such reward for no risk
That's just it: CCP didn't do that — you did.
You allowed for that reward.
You reduced their risk.
Start looking there before you assign blame elsewhere.
So tell us, wheres the risk sitting at a gate scanning for a profitable suicide gank? Why isnt this done in null sec? Thats right. The weakest link. Concord. The only thing thats there to protect high security is a brain dead AI bot easily predicatable and as such we have protitable suicide attacks. Suicide attacks should never be profitable. The notion that loosing makes you win is called broken and therefore an exploit in PVP games. No one can argue otherwise. No one. Not even CCP.
It is done in nullsec, all the time. But you're right. I believe Eve IS broken. Eve is broken because Concord exists and because the npc corps exist. The problem is that people expect highsec to be completely safe and when they get ganked their whole world comes crashing down. The NPC corps should be the faction warfare corporations. New players should be introduced to the risk of eve immediately and learn to handle it. If you accept risk everywhere either in faction warfare or war decs on player corporations, you won't do stupid things like sit afk on a gate in a paper thin industrial with a couple mil in the trunk. And what would be some of the benefits? Less macro mining, less macro missioning, more regional economies, increased player interactions... But all this can never happen because Eve is too old and has too many michwich's in it. |
Dynast
Osirians Of Eve
Curatores Veritatis Alliance |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:39:00 - [ 39]
Originally by: Michwich
Theres not just me, theres 2 sides to this equation. And on the other side there was no risk, its been calculated that there would be none before I was attacked. Risk would be greater variability in whats destroyed and whats not. Risk would be the possibility of someone alerting the authorities that there were known criminals around. Risk would be having a module that defeated cargo scans making the otherside have to guess or gather intelligence. Risk is not hitting the cargo scan button and then firing your high slots. Thats not risk.
You made it profitable, not CCP. CCP didn't sit your fat, lazy butt in a paper-thin industrial with loot worth more than a hundred times what the ship is worth. All your blather and pathetic trolling pretty much boils down to one incontrovertable fact: you owned yourself. Cry me a river. |
Bud Johnson
Broski Enterprises |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:40:00 - [ 40]
Originally by: Michwich
Theres not just me, theres 2 sides to this equation. And on the other side there was no risk, its been calculated that there would be none before I was attacked. Risk would be greater variability in whats destroyed and whats not. Risk would be the possibility of someone alerting the authorities that there were known criminals around. Risk would be having a module that defeated cargo scans making the otherside have to guess or gather intelligence. Risk is not hitting the cargo scan button and then firing your high slots. Thats not risk.
Losing your ship to concord = risk Drop not covering your loss = risk Someone ninja-ing your loot = risk AFK on a gate in a T1 hauler with 150+ mil in cargo = ???? |
Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:41:00 - [ 41]
Originally by: Michwich
Theres not just me, theres 2 sides to this equation. And on the other side there was no risk,
Yes there was: you might not have come along, making them waste all their time. Quote:
Risk would be the possibility of someone alerting the authorities that there were known criminals around.
You mean, you not being AFK, and noticing these individuals and perhaps taken a different route? Yes, that would have worked… if you weren't AFK. Quote:
Risk would be having a module that defeated cargo scans making the otherside have to guess or gather intelligence.
Uhm… that's what the scanners are for: gather intelligence. And there is a way to defeat them: don't fly AFK. |
Michwich |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:41:00 - [ 42]
Originally by: Dynast
Originally by: Michwich
Theres not just me, theres 2 sides to this equation. And on the other side there was no risk, its been calculated that there would be none before I was attacked. Risk would be greater variability in whats destroyed and whats not. Risk would be the possibility of someone alerting the authorities that there were known criminals around. Risk would be having a module that defeated cargo scans making the otherside have to guess or gather intelligence. Risk is not hitting the cargo scan button and then firing your high slots. Thats not risk.
You made it profitable, not CCP. CCP didn't sit your fat, lazy butt in a paper-thin industrial with loot worth more than a hundred times what the ship is worth. All your blather and pathetic trolling pretty much boils down to one incontrovertable fact: you owned yourself.
Cry me a river.
Yep, thats the point. I own myself and I lose isk. Suicide ganker owns themself and they profit. WAAAAAAAAA |
Plim
Gallente
Everything Financial
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:44:00 - [ 43]
But they also own you.
|
Zeba
Minmatar
Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:49:00 - [ 44]
Originally by: Bud Johnson
Someone ninja-ing your loot = risk
Confirming this can harvest loads of suicide gank tears in local, evemail, private convos or sometimes a humerous combination of all three. Nothing worse for a suicide ganker than scanning out a juicy mark and popping him only to have the lootz taken away and ending up with a total loss. So use something cloaky with a mwd and wait for them to pop a clueless hauler then uncloak and mwd over to ninja the wreck and salvage it with extra points for getting to the bs wreck before the gankers hauler and doing the same.  |
Michwich |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:49:00 - [ 45]
Edited by: Michwich on 02/11/2009 20:49:03
But come on... admit it... its too easy. Should be harder and more dangerouse. Sitting afk with that little amount of isk and being targeted. The bar needs to be raised a bit. Its like putting a cap on whats considered too much money and worthy of the ultimate act of desperation - suicide and 150m is just too little |
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:49:00 - [ 46]
CONCORD needs a blacklist. As soon as someone embarasses them by commiting a serious crime in their space that's it, no hisec for you, 2 years. And no amount of sec status grinding can change their mind. |
Haulerboi |
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:49:00 - [ 47]
Originally by: Michwich
So I come back to my Bestower to see my pod instead floating nearby a stargate in Jita.
Thats enough CCP. If I cant AFK in high sec with a measly 150million worth in cargo youre not getting my money anymore. Sorry. Bye.
just 150m? Try 1.2 BILLION A single BS has enough DPS to suicide a tanked T1 hauler, so you can't (safely) use a T1 hauler to carry more than: cost of raven + insurance + fit - raven insurance payout |
Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:52:00 - [ 48]
Originally by: Michwich
But come on... admit it... its too easy.
No. If anything, it's too hard these days. You can sit outsite Jita 4-4 for hours now without ever being able to steal stuff others have ganked for…  |
Zeba
Minmatar
Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:53:00 - [ 49]
|
Kir'ian
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:05:00 - [ 50]
Sometimes its not about ISK profit... *FUN* has its own currency. And blowing your ship to bits was probably paid pretty good *FUN* for whoever did it.
Or... Maybe Concord just hates you. =D
|
Luaren Avidius |
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:13:00 - [ 51]
So this is whine thread number how many about how you wish you could autopilot your damned Dodixie loot to the highest buy orders in the Caldari state in perfect safety in a paper thin T1 hauler?
I wish those Uedama suicide gankers the best of luck. You deserve it. |
Eskalin
Minmatar
Evolution
The Initiative. |
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:22:00 - [ 52]
really just STFU troll. i'll give 2 to 1 that you will still be paying for your sub in 3 months |
Michwich |
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:34:00 - [ 53]
Edited by: Michwich on 02/11/2009 21:33:55 Originally by: Eskalin
really just STFU troll. i'll give 2 to 1 that you will still be paying for your sub in 3 months
Youre right. This games not for carebears. Its for carebear eaters only. If you cant take getting ganked then just dont play. You guys win. Ill leave. /unsub |
kyrieee
Bite me inc.
Narwhals Ate My Duck |
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:37:00 - [ 54]
Originally by: Demolishar
Damn.
I just suicide ganked a guy, but you're not him. :(
Same :( |
Comodore John
Gallente
Trixi IFI
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:38:00 - [ 55]
0/10 on troll thread. Originally by: Michwich
So I come back to my Bestower to see my pod instead floating nearby a stargate in Jita.
Thats enough CCP. If I cant AFK in high sec with a measly 150million worth in cargo youre not getting my money anymore. Sorry. Bye.
Also, bolded the part where you failed miserably. |
wickedpheonix
Caldari
Guy Fawkes Trust Fund
31ST Reliables Division |
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:39:00 - [ 56]
Edited by: wickedpheonix on 02/11/2009 21:41:10
So let's get this clear:
1) 150m in cargo
2) tiny little T1 bestower
3) AFK autopiloting
4) To Jita, where all the gankers are going to be waiting for your autopilot to finish and for your ship to just sit in space for a half hour while you get back to your keyboard.
In the meantime, your ganker has a BS fitted out with guns/missiles that can easily do probably around 3,000 damage in one volley (thinking missiles here), which means your little bestower is cooked. Especially if the guns can be tanked for any decent amount of time.
Oh yeah and he has insurance to get back most of what he lost. And you say this isn't profitable for him?! And it doesn't even HAVE to be profitable - this is EVE. It's enough to grab a Scorpion + full fit of t2 smartbombs + field full of Hulks and let yourself loose.
QQ some more n00b and contract me your stuff before you quit, ok? I'm not saying CCP doesn't need to cater to carebears but there's a billion different ways to avoid gankers in high sec if you really wanted. You didn't need to use a crappy T1 indy, you didn't need to cart your 150m all the way to Jita, and you didn't need to AFK pilot it. Asking CCP to nerf ganking because you can't carebear properly is asking CCP to pussify the game. |
Michwich |
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:43:00 - [ 57]
Originally by: wickedpheonix
So let's get this clear:
1) 150m in cargo
2) tiny little T1 bestower
3) AFK autopiloting
4) To Jita, where all the gankers are going to be waiting for your autopilot to finish and for your ship to just sit in space for a half hour while you get back to your keyboard.
In the meantime, your ganker has a BS fitted out with guns/missiles that can easily do probably around 3,000 damage in one volley (thinking missiles here), which means your little bestower is cooked. Especially if the guns can be tanked for any decent amount of time.
Oh yeah and he has insurance to get back most of what he lost. And you say this isn't profitable for him?! And it doesn't even HAVE to be profitable - this is EVE. It's enough to grab a Scorpion + full fit of t2 smartbombs + field full of Hulks and let yourself loose.
QQ some more n00b and contract me your stuff before you quit, ok?
Ok, bend over and I will contanct you with my stuff. Wait... I still got 29 days left on this cancelled sub. Youre going to have to wait. |
Kurlieu
Gallente
The Ore House
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:47:00 - [ 58]
It's just the cost of doing business. The suicide ganker is out only the cost of fittings. They will probably get reimbursed (or even make a bit) from the insurance to cover the BS. If your cargo is worth more than the fittings they use to alpha you, it's a reasonable business decision. I doubt they even fit a tank. Hell, I know pilots who will self destruct when the insurance is up if the ship has made money for them, although this is not, imo, a sensible decision. Some folks just like to see pretty explosions, or make grown men cry, - and it's worth the price of admission for them, to each his own. All your tears and rage just provide sustenance for future gankers.
It's not a decision I would make, but can I see where it makes a certain amount of sense. Surely you've noticed yourself being followed from time to time to see if you're on autopilot. Most Indies are shadowed. These forums are rife with good suggestions to protect yourself and your cargo while hauling. Flying AFK on autopilot is not one of those good suggestions.
Just as with Police in real life, Concord is a deterrent, not a protection. The Police and Concord serve the state, not the people. If you want a rules change, and I'm not saying things should be changed, look at eliminating insurance payments for self destructing and being Concorded.
By the way, I'm told that all the stations have bathrooms. Pee at the stations, otherwise you're just peein' and crappin' in your pod, and that can't be very sanitary.
|
Rordan D'Kherr
Amarr |
Posted - 2009.11.02 22:04:00 - [ 59]
- make character
- go to e-o forums
- post about quitting
- biomass char
- create new char for complaints
|
Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 22:52:00 - [ 60]
The rule of thumb is to NEVER use an untanked T1 hauler to haul more than 20 million ISK worth of goods - ESPECIALLY AFK. Actually, thanks to insurance, it can be profitable for a suicide ganker to kill you with only about 8 million ISK in your untanked hauler.
Anyways, the lesson learned is this:
TANK YOUR T1 HAULER, AND DON'T FLY AFK NEAR TRADE HUBS. |
All Channels
Out of Pod Experience
