Should Freighter Ganking Be Nerfed?

Avatar
James 315 thank you for another poorly written article. Personally i support changes to freighter (not a so called nerf to ganking). Freighters are the only ship in eve that doesn't provide a pilot fitting choices. People should be allowed to make choices both dumb and smart.Compare this situation to real life. Somali pirates that "gank" ships off the coast of Africa. Guess what happened the real worlds version of CCP changed things up to stop the ganking. That is what happens in real life and EVE is meant to model real life to some degree. It makes sense that things will adapt and change.In this case my suggestion is simply to allow freighters fitting slots so that pilots can make their own decisions.https://forums.eveonline.com/d...
Avatar
If the process was exactly as you describe then I would have no issue with it. Unfortunately you miss out the "noob suicide" step. This is a clear exploitation of the agression mechanics and invalidates all the rest of the great work that is done by the gankers.TL;DR Dont abuse the agression mechanics and you would have my complete respect
Avatar
If you're capable of ganking several freighters a day and do not expect a response from the community and/or CCP then you're delusional.
Avatar
Tier 3 BCs were a huge buff to freighter ganking, you've had a lot of fun and wonderful kills. Now the cycle might (might!) go the other way, and you're pre-whining? Priceless.
Avatar
The fact you don't agree with the article doesn't mean it's poorly written. Indeed, this article is more articulate than your poorly literate comment. It's not evenews24 jesus christ.
Avatar
First of all please explain how my comment is "poorly literate". Second of all the reason the articles this guy writes are poorly written is because they are extremely biased. He name calls and categorizes all possible dissenters as if his opinion is the only possible conclusion. He makes no attempt to examine possible reasons why he could be wrong.Well written articles involve more thought and research than this author seems to be willing to provide. They also tend to have the author playing "devils advocate" to their own points to provide some level of grounding.Please in the future before you judge my comment for being a snap judgement. Examine your own snap judgment.
Avatar
A very interesting article, albeit from an author who's articles' main bullet points are:1) because Carebears2) if it's emergent gameplay, it should be allowed no matter what.Having said that - the author does make very valid points.1) nothing should be entirely risk free, and demanding that freighter pilots be able to fly within empire space with no consequences is detrimental to the vision of the game2) a nerf to ganking is a buff to freighter. Brilliantly said, and very much valid.3) What Miniluv has done is incredibly efficient and organized. Major kudos are deserved, and in a recent AMA on Reddit, a member of Miniluv spoke at length about freighter ganking. The author makes an excellent point that (paraphrasing) "if you want a nerf saying it's easy, you try and do it"Having said that, there are a few topics I'd like to bring to light:Claim #1:The author asserts that the systems by which Miniluv gank in are public knowledge, and I quote "The Miniluv target systems are public knowledge, since the killmails are public. Freighters can avoid these systems with no effort on their part. Even if it means an extra jump or two on an alternate route, the freighter pilot is unaffected, since he's AFK autopiloting anyway."Comment:While it is true that one need only log onto Eve Kill (when it's up...haha) to see where the latest ganks have occurred, what is misleading and disingenuous about this claim is that you can simply avoid these systems, and they'll only bring you off course by about 1 or 2 jumps. This is simply not true. It is commonly held that Uedama is the 0.5 system that Miniluv performs many of their freighter ganks. As proof, I would direct the author to use Battlieclinic's Route Planner here: http://eve.battleclinic.com/ro...Now we put Uedama and Niarja, both 0.5 systems that have shown Miniluv kills on the avoidance list, and we get an error - "Unable to find a path from Amarr to Jita through hi sec space." So unless you want to travel through low sec space, it simply is not possible, nor advisable. Miniluv is no mere two-bit operation, there are 0.5 systems that connect the major regions in Empire space, these are chokepoints being targeted, and for good reason - most freighters must go through them.Claim #2:The author asserts that a gank proof way to move commodities and goods safely is to use an Orca.Comment:The Orca, was designed to be a mining support vessel, and it does indeed have an unscannable corp hangar and does not drop loot. However, one must ask, "if we all use Orcas, what's the point of a freighter then?" While I do not agree that hauling ridiculous (< 1 billion ISK) loads in one trip, there is a reason freighters were placed in the game. "Fly an Orca" is not a be all, end all solution.This article attempts to be balanced and objective, but falls short. Between "because carebears" and "organized emergent gameplay" the true solution lies between the "whiners/kneejerkers/jealous" and Miniluv. The issue is not as cut and dry as the author attempts to make it.
Avatar
Did you just compare space game morals to that of real life?
Avatar
by that logic, if you're capable of doing x, y or z and not expect a response you're also delusional?Why should the game protect afking? Thats like an armored van moving around from bank to bank at 1/mh with its doors open and no guards and then complaining when someone steals the cash that the police didnt arrive fast enough to prevent it...
Avatar
If you're capable of trading billions of isk without risk in a game whose most popular motto is "don't undock with what you can't afford to lose" and want it to become even more without risk then you're delusional
Avatar
Thank you for this article who describe well the type of players that would be in favor of a nerf to ganking (or a buff to freighter). EVE has always been a game about adaptation, and is, to a certain degree, a good example of natural selection. Those who can't change their style of play, will certainly die in such gank. But the problem isn't only about ganking. Many players, not only in high-sec, but in every sphere of eve, prefer asking CCP to adapt the game to their gaming style instead of doing effort to cope with new situation. While it can be profitable for CCP obvious marketing and financial needs, letting these attitudes decide the fate of eve put at risk the whole philosophy of EVE. EVE is supposed to be a sandbox where everything can happen. More and more you put rules, less and less the ''everything can happen'' part is true.
Avatar
Freighter ganking got a massive boost when ti3 battlecruisers were born. No longer did you need 1bil ISK in ships to gank a freighter. No longer did you need 1 year old pilots with battleship skills.Truth is, ganking got a huge boost with ti3s hence why burn jita was possible. Now that people are asking for this to be addressed, the goon tears are already welling up ready to flood the 'net as soon as CCP make the obvious move to restore it back to the way it was i.e. significant investment in pilot skill / numbers / ship cost should be required for high-sec freighter ganking.Regardless of what all the unskilled pilots of new eden tell you, high sec ganking is still pretty much risk free.
Avatar
Brutix
Avatar
As a matter of fact I made no comment about morals. I simply said that in real life "freighters" adapt. The idea of them adapting to pirates in a game made to model real life....well it just makes sense. I'm not anti-gank. That doesn't mean ships in EVE should never be adapted or changed.People should be given choice. To fit their freighter with lower cargo but better resists if they want more saftey. Fitting is an important part of EVE and separates good and bad players. I simply would argue against the author of this article in that I think people should be given choice that allows them to defend themselves against these types of ganks. Trust me there are still idiots that will get ganked.Now I don't know if CCP will change this and until then i'll just continue along with my orca.
Avatar
I agree that the author could have gone more in depth with the opposition. I was very disappointed to see a mere few sentences given to just name-call those that want a nerf to ganking. However, I do agree with some of his points, and I don't think afk-ing with billions of isk should be viable.
Avatar
I don't support a buff to freighters.What I would like to see is some way for civilians in hisec to respond to suicide ganking. I think that some of the proposed changes to aggression mechanics, transferable kill-rights and whatnot might help.The problem for a freighter is that it can't really adjust your methods all that much, you have no fittings to change, you can't bring a gang with you to provide a military escort...Taking a different route and carrying less that a bil in cargo are not really practical solutions. You can't change your route to avoid Jita and if you need to get your cargo to the Khanid end of the galaxy you have to go through the choke point of Niarja.Splitting up your cargo also does not work for long, high-value cargo runs. Try taking 20b in cargo from Jita to TEST space. You're looking at 40 jumps (round trip) in hisec. Limit yourself to 1b per trip and that becomes 800 jumps! and those are snails-pace freighter-speed jumps.Again, I'm not arguing for a buff.Just sayin'What remains is courier contracts with collateral and bypassing trouble-spots via JF.That raises shipping costs quite a bit for some destinations.I miss the ease of hitting autopilot with 15b+ in cargo (a lot) but I welcome the new challenge and *love* seeing my competitors get their asses handed to them when they fail to adapt.also, CSB: a few weeks ago some dude tried to gank my 1.1b isk cargo charon and failed, leaving 4% structure. I've got to commend any group who can make freighter shipping exciting.
Avatar
"Guess what happened the real worlds version of CCP changed things up to stop the ganking."What? God himself descended and changed something? wow.
Avatar
Sorry, I had misunderstood your point on real life pirates then. In that case, I do agree that active freighters should be able to do something about getting ganked. But I also think that it is the afk who are getting ganked anyways, so it's an irrelevant argument for the specific topic.
Avatar
Actually, you're wrong on that one. While they did add Tier 3 BC's (most notably the Tornado in this case), they also removed insurance payout for concorded ships AT THE SAME TIME.As a result, the only thing we got was a stalemate (otherwise you'd have to use a Tempest or Maelstrom) in terms of isk loss for the suicide ship.
Avatar
If everything can happen, then by your own logic why can't ships be changed to meet consumer demands? That is how real life works and a sandbox MMO like this is supposed to model real life to a degree.There is an argument for changing how freighters work that isn't a buff to freighters it's simply allowing them fitting choices with the downside being hauling capacity.I think ganking is important to the game. I believe people should simply be given fitting choices with freighters. Some will make good choices and many will make bad ones. Such is eve.
Avatar
I think you missed the part about the level of organisation high-sec ganking requires. Effort for effort, if freighter pilots would organise themselves the same way that miniluv is, there would be no more freighter ganked. Problem isn't about T3 Battlecruiser (wich I agree make it easier all type of gank) but with the failure of certain player to play their game. From the moment they decide to AFK travel, knowing the risk or not, they put their ship at the mercy of such gank. It's not good, but it's not bad, it's only a decision who may have consequence. If these player can't assume their own decision, I don't think CCP must do it for them.
Avatar
Because adapting the game is the easy solution for something this article prove to be rare and difficult to acheive. Ganking is too often perceived to be a problem, like you seem to think. But ganking IS part of the game. Real life don't always work like you stated. Sometimes, consumer are deceived, people are victime of scam, heist, people are getting robbed or killed. You can't decide the moment of your own death exept if you commit suicide. Your analogy with real world only prove you are wrong.
Avatar
Hisec is not safe and people stop trying to make it
Avatar
See the problem is I don't think that is necessarily true. What about AFK freighters makes them any more vulnerable than a piloted freighter?Ask yourself if you were being bumped, had no mods, and a ship so slow it can't run from anything. How can you save yourself even if your present?You see CCP has set freighters up to be an AFK ship because frankly there is nothing you can do to protect them. Unless you fly alts beside them in logis.Which leads back to the argument I am trying to make. Give freighters fitting choices so they can make trade offs between tank and hauling capacity. An tanked freighter (with it's pilot present to turn modules on) should be able to actively do something to help itself out. This would still leave AFK freighters vulnerable to gankers. I think this is a perfect trade off in the spirit of EVE.
Avatar
So what if there is no other route between those systems? Make yourself less of a target by reducing the value of what you are carrying and/or don't AP. As he said, a bit of effort to protect that 10bil takes far less time than making it in the first place. With that in mind then yes an orca is the solution to hauling largish high value stuff and the freighter still maintains its role for hauling very large low-mid value items. It's unbearably simple.If what you are carrying is worth ganking, it should be worth putting some effort into protecting.
Avatar
What about the people that are not AFK auto-piloiting and just get constantly bumped by a suicide ganker until the gank squad can get in range?
Avatar
Freighters have their place in eve- they can on almost any given day fly in any highsec system besides chokepoint .5s wherever they want, as long as they are not carrying too much, and as long there is no special event like "Burn Jita". Freighers can be used under escort just about anywhere, even 0.0. What if you had a contingent of 4 720mm hurricanes following your obelisk- would you not then be able to navigate niarja with a modestly- sized load? 1shotting all catalysts, and quickly destroying taloses, who are FFA kills. How bout a couple falcons? 1 logi?The point is if 20 people are determined to kill you in highsec, they should be able to. if you get even 3 or 4 others, they are prevented unless they go burn-jita style, which frankly isn't sustainable, and shouldn't be. You can play this game solo, but you aren't going to be able to everything, compared to if you're with a team.A claim could be made for the fairness of bumping, but again 1 logi ship wins you that engagement.
Avatar
I really don't understand. All you need to do is bring a webber through that system. Instant warp.They need 20 people to kill you, and wait there indefinitely. You need to bring 1 webber in 1 system. People who truly want this nerfed and are just not trolling are ridiculous.
Avatar
Benjamin, I think your getting confused. Yes sometime people are deceived and scammed but people adapt to it. They demand new products and different kinds of protection. I think ganking should always be viable. I simply believe that smart players with well fit tanks (along with being there to turn them on) and only a reasonable amount of money in their cargo hold should not ever be profitable to gank.
Avatar
What makes them more vulnerable is they land 15km off of a gate and they aren't present to see their ship get scanned down. Both of these alone put any afk-er in the position to get ganked. Active freighters getting bumped can't be helped (as of yet), but I doubt too many active freighters get ganked compared to afk freighters.
Avatar
I think you missed the part about cost / risk / reward also being major factors. Hint: Freighter loses out big style, ganker wins big style. Moving these parameters back to pre ti3 / weapons buff levels makes sense in terms of freighter ganking. The obvious way is to buff freighter HP. But really, it sounds as though gankers are already getting upset and nothing has even been considered yet by CCP. They cry more than the carebears they gank which is quite an achievement.
Avatar
But you can easily get ganked not autopiloting.
Avatar
I understand what you saying but you miss a couple of game mechanics. Any scanner worth his salt uses the ingame mod that masks you being locked. Can't think of the name off the top of my head but it means you will never actually know you were being scanned. Then once you jump into the .5 system which you have to on most routes you can be bumped and killed at the gankers leisure. Their is nothing you can do even if you are active. Hence why change to the game is needed. CCP needs to give freighter pilots some way of defending themselves. I'm not talking about eliminating ganking or even really nerfing it. It should be just as viable as it is now. But like other types of ships freighters should be given choice so they can choose to better tank themselves while moving less cargo.Gankers can scan see their tank and ignore these targets and move on to some idiot that is AFKing with 20 billion isk in his hold.
Avatar
"... lower cargo but better resists if they want more saftey."You do realize that if you do have this choice right? It is not a module, right, but just load your freighter with less cargo and you effectively increase your resists of a different type of tank, by lowering your tastyness.
Avatar
How many torpedo frigates do you need to sink an oil tanker?Just use an orca with tank or jump freighter with exit cyno..Or take multiple trips through the dangerzone
Avatar
While this is true Captain you have to ask yourself. How much do 6 talos and 1 Brutix cost? This is what they seem to use most often more or less. They can gank freighters for profit with only a couple billion isk in their holds which is pretty ridiculous. Anyone carrying 10 or 20 billion isk in one ship that can be scanned deserves to burn in a fire. But carrying 5 billion isk in a freighter is perfectly reasonable and people should be able to at least tank themselves so that much isk is safe in a freighter.Just my two cents.
Avatar
Freighter ganking is simply the culling of the lazy and stupid, 90% of the ganks were caused by the pilots own greed or the autopilot function. I'm a Hisec player and I'm all for the ganking of idiots, it takes some potential ISK out of the equation and makes me chortle when I see the killmails.If we allow stupidity to breed then stupid becomes the norm, this cannot be allowed to prevail, the stupid is already spreading, you only have to look at the mining barge buffs. There was no real need to buff the ehp of the barges, what was needed is education, people expected to fly around in an untanked couple of hundred million isk ship and not get ganked, they got ganked, they whined, CCP pandered to stupid, they were wrong to do so.
Avatar
So what you're saying is that you are affiliated with a group that has been manufacturing Orcas, and you have a large supply. Market manipulation through the press. Well played.
Avatar
... so by what is supposed to be your pathetic attempt at using logic - an attempt which ended in horrible failure might I add - it would seem that the Rancer smartbombers, killing dozens upon dozens of frigates and pods daily since years ago should be nerfed ? The solo PVPer raking kills daily should see his ship of choice nerfed ? Basically, every successfull activity in EVE should be nerfed if it can be repeated 10 times a day ?For your information, HUNDREDS of Freighters pass through these systems daily and survive with their riches, as well as hundreds of other haulers in everything from Orca to Blockade Runners, well-tanked Transport Ships, übertanked T3, etc... Miniluv on its best days may catch something like 10 Freighters, 15 on week-ends ? What makes this ratio so scandalous that it should call for a nerf ?
Avatar
@santanotrel: this is a common misconception. The afk Freighter full of juicy stuff is a rarity nowadays. Actually, many Freighter pilots themselves believe to be safe as long as they don't afk. The result is the vast majority of Freighter kills are from piloted Freighters (at least 70%, possibly up to 90%).Now your point comparing it to Somali Pirates is well taken in my opinion, especially as it highlights the defensive possibilities.1° Change your route !2° Travel in heavily escorted convoys.3° Have some hired firepower of your own on board.Translated into EVE, 1° is obviously the same thing, while 2° and 3° amount to the same common idea: armed escorts. Now here is the only qualm I have about the current situation: it is that there is no reasonable way for an escort to preemptively engage the gankers. But judging from the recent announcments, the new aggression mechanics will open new possibilities here (and also heavily affect the 'looting' part of the process).
Avatar
Trade-able killrights already represent a large nerf to freighter ganking, along with every other threat to the carebear population, so direct intervention is really not desirable.
Avatar
Is it so difficult to understand? What is stopping you from JUST moving less cargo? This alone will protect you, call it a "profit tank".
Avatar
Escorting your freighter as you describe would be the ideal solution in my mind. However unless/until some of the proposed aggression changes go through the gank-fleet are not FFA kills, you would have to be counter-suicide-ganking them as your hurricanes would draw the same concord response they do.
Avatar
While I agree that a nerf to gank is not called for in the current situation (at least not in the form of a 'buff Freighter HP), honesty compels me to say the OP doesn't strike me as making a very good case.First, there is the persistent myth that the majority of dead Freighters are afk. That is simply NOT TRUE. Ask anybody doing serious Freighter gank, and they will readily admit that the vast majority of their kills are piloted Freighters. Not that it changes the situation much actually, but still this misconception need to be rooted out.Also, Miniluv is the first group to make Freighter ganking their ONLY activity, but not the first to do it repeatedly with a succesfull doctrine and organisation. At one time, you could expect Gypsy Band to gank an average of 5 to 10 Freighter a week (mostly during the week-end by way of jump-cloning from their 0.0 hideout) - and trying to ninja steal their loot was damn hard, these guys were very professional.Next is the 'take another road' idea. Very clever, only it doesn't work for most people. Niarja and Uedama are camped for a reason: you just can't avoid them while still travelling in highsec, for the vast majority of the hauling either start and/or end in Jita/Amarr/any other big trade hub.Also you make looting look much more difficult than it actually is. No need to 'choose' what to take, you just bring your looting freighter next to the target being bumped, along with the ganking ships, you shoot, loot the whole wreck, and voilà. Don't imagine difficulties where there are next to none.At the same time, you could have been more eloquent on the ways to avoid a gank. There at least three more practical methods not even hinted at in your article, which is a shame since they would support your stance much more efficiently by highlighting the casual Freighter pilot lazyness.TLDR: a good point but poorly presented.
Avatar
I am a space Teamster, and make most of my isk from logistics so this topic hits pretty close to home with me. I have never been ganked, but I am frustrated with limited options in which I can't differentiate myself from the common fool with regard to gank risk.For example, when I am jumping my Jump Freighter, my life or death depends on the skill I have in positioning cyno's, knowledge of stations, situational awareness, knowledge of dangerous corps and alliances, and knowledge of PVP. My knowledge and experience of over 1000 jumps through low and nullsec makes all the difference in how efficient and safe I am. This is my expertise -my care bear specialty. This is also true for most 'professions' in Eve. However as soon as I warp to the high sec gate and move through empire, no amount of experience or knowledge really matters. My choices are few to lesson my risk, don't autopilot, or jump around the hotspots. Neither of which are a guarantee but the later does negate a lot of the risk. However, a regular freighter often does not have the ability to "go around" as many routes in and out of Jita necessarily include Niarja or Uedema.I find it a poor argument that the current system is just fine and you need just carry less cargo. Besides the fact that freighters are ganked because they have cargo hidden in a double container, Freighters where made to haul so they should be able to have a way of doing it that does not depend on luck. I double wrap most loads, but on a scan I must look like I am hiding a great treasure even when its just a drake.Is there too much ganking right now? I don't think so.Should Freighter HP be buffed? NoShould freighter safety depend on the skill, attention, experience, and awareness of the freighter pilot? Yes.In short there needs to be more "game" in hauling and less Russian roulette.
Avatar
Even "professional" freight services (e.g. Red Frog Freight Service) will only allow 1B shipments. If "amateur" freight pilots want to fly with 5B loads, then they should assume the risk or try to plan better. As the article mentions, organizing a freighter gank takes a LOT of effort and coordination; you quote 6 talos and 1 brutix, which have all to be highly trained to get the required DSP, you need logistics having handled the ships, all the scanners and bumpers. That is a big gang, not a lone pilot. Why should a lone pilot survive to a 20 man organized attack? (by the way, nobody mentions hidden cost of all the gankers' accounts)
Avatar
This time it's you who are wrong my friend. Yes the 'Passive Targeter' you are thinking of does mask the lock, however it doesn't hide the conspicuous ray of yellowish light going toward your ship. CCP did take pains to make it more visible than in the old days (in the old days it was even more dim than current EW effects ^^), and as long as you pay attention you will know you are getting cargo scanned.
Avatar
Also, I doubt you could save a freighter from minilove with a logi.They are killed by an alpha strike. maaaaybe a second shot.Even if you landed some reps at the correct second you could only give 1 cycle, nothing compared to the 150,000 hp being blapped.If you manage to identify a gank-fleet in time, and if you have a couple of cheaply fit arty canes or something maybe you could suicide gank enough of them before they fire to put them below the required alpha capability.It would be really interesting to try. Problem is, you couldn't take out the Mach that is bumping your freighter and that lets them take their time reforming and trying again.
Avatar
Stupidity has always been upsetting when it's generalized
Avatar
And this assumption about afk freighters is based on experience?
Avatar
I would like to introduce you to this not new or innovative website, dotlan.
Avatar
"Freighters where made to haul so they should be able to have a way of doing it that does not depend on luck. I double wrap most loads, but on a scan I must look like I am hiding a great treasure even when its just a drake."There are ways to do it that doesn't depend on luck.Don't Double Wrap your loads and don't carry an inordinate amount ISK in cargo.Bring a Friend to ScoutBring some friends with ECM or DPS boats to Jam or Kill the gankers (who are gonna take 15-20s to kill the freighter.Remember, you're Solo, they're bringing ~15-20 people. No other ship can do much solo against a gang of 15-20 designed to kill it. Why should a Freighter?
Avatar
Think about that really hard and you'll see where the problem is.
Avatar
Something is being overlooked here--don't carebears have a right to be carebears and be left alone in highsec? What if they want nothing to do with PvP and just mind their business. Why should they be targeted if they are not involved in any kind of war or dispute? And if this is allowed to continued, shouldn't there be some REAL penalties rather than loss of security status? How about the gankers making FULL RESTITUTION on all losses--so if you want to knock over freighters, make sure you have the isk to replace em. One more thing--carebears are paying customers too....and if enough of them complain, it would CCP's best interest (and bottom line) to pay attention and address the issue.
Avatar
Either don't undock with more than 2 billion in your freighter, don't fly through uedama or other camped systems, or do something more creative to evade the gankers.
Avatar
Yes, there are ways, but as I said they are few. I have nine accounts and I don't need someone else to scout and I can scout with a double webber, but if someone wants to gank you, you are not going to stop them.I reject the whole notion that the answer is just to haul small loads. Freighters where meant to haul, so they should have a way of doing that apart from luck...or not hauling...BTW, ganks are alpha attacks so ewar and dps are useless in preventing a gank, but it might get you on the KM.
Avatar
Miniluv freighter ganks aren't alpha attacks. You don't use blasters for alpha.
Avatar
fanfic/tinfoil hattery - freighter becomes a battlestation in epic space battles/baitship that is a dreadnought. Hauling is a boring activity. You will get no argument from me there. Ask any trucker and I'd imagine most of their job is pretty boring driving. The problem I think you cite is how to make something that is boring in real life not boring in a game. Introducing modules and mini-games I think is a crazy way to do it which is where my incredulous comment came from.As an aside, I didn't even look at the names at first and realize it was your reply to your post. The original post I thought was fantastic. The suggestions reply I thought was crazy.Instead of adding and modifying things about the freighter, why not include other pilots as an escort? There's content. Freighters already can receive remote assistance anyway. Any ship can. Apart from assigning the hauling to an NPC and covering them in a combat ship of your own some person has to pilot that ship. Convoys and escort duty suck; Hauling sucks; but if you change them by adding "things" you turn them into Puzzle Pirates, not EVE
Avatar
If freighters were killed by alpha, miniluv wouldn't be using blasters.
Avatar
Alpha, in this context, does not refer to the fleet doctrine commonly referred to as "alpha fleet" but the fact that the target is destroyed practically by a single shot from all ships. Typically you get one, maybe two shots off before concord pops you. I know there are ways to stretch this out some but I think the basic point is true--that the freighter goes down before your "escort" ewar or dps can be effective. So even if you bring 50 dudes, the freighter still dies.
Avatar
Technically what I suggested was a fighting ship that appeared to be a freighter,is not a freighter that transforms into something that shoots. Given that subterfuge of this sort is used in almost every human conflict, I would hardly call the idea crazy--I still think you are misusing the 'tinfoin hat' metaphor, but I least I get what you are trying to say.Also, I did not say hauling was boring. It is boring, and I don't see how that could change, but that point is irrelevant. Getting ganked is largely a feature of chance where avoiding it should be about attention, focus, skill and knowledge.I think you are actually agreeing with me. The whole nonsense about the freighter triage module was about making it so a freighter could be supported by a fleet. Today, the freighter does not live long enough in a gank for an escort to make a decisive difference, or even repair them. They just die from a massive volley of DPS. So yes, I think escorts would be a way this could work, but you would have to have a way of addressing the fact that before an escort fleet can shoot the bad guys, the freighter dies.
Avatar
It's hardly a secret - anyone who was paying any attention at all during the last Hulkageddon should have picked that trick up. And the miners were using it defensively, too, pre-spawning CONCORD in their belts to protect them.Gee, you'd think that smart freighters pilots who wanted to get through Udema could do something similar. But that would be being smart and adapting.
Avatar
The article is better written than anything your illiterate ass can write.Freighters don't need fitting slots - there are ships intended to fill the role of hauling expensive loads. Freighters are meant to haul low-value bulk loads.
Avatar
Everything seems to be angling toward advance scout fleet then. If we're talking about highsec it would be about alpha shotting the bumper and webbing the freighter into warp before the support fleet gets logged on or in position, or if already logged on getting them engaged somehow first. It would be messy, sure, but it's the same problem crimewatch has always had. You can't legally preemptively deal with potential criminals. You have to wait until they become actual criminals at least in the U.S. ( prosecuting thought crimes doesn't work so well without a mountain of evidence )So far as alpha shotting the freighter... well... yea, it's a numbers game and I don't think a viable solution of any kind exists that doesn't just serve a kind of escalation mechanic. Bring enough people to deal with the escorting fleet AND the freighter sort of stuff. The problem with false flag operations is then you create a "clearly looking for a fight/bait" scenario. IF there were a freighter looking ship that actually carried weapons someone would have to pilot it and undock with the intention of looking for a fight since its hauling capacity would be compromised. That makes it a war scenario though. The false flag operations you mention do happen, sure, but they happen in wartime.Highsec is supposed to represent a somewhat peacetime area where the gank gangs are seen as gangs and not as armies. Under normal circumstances you can sail a false flag ship around anywhere in the world and nothing will ever happen unless someone attacks it. Such a ship in EVE would be specifically looking for a fight and waiting for someone else to start it. I see it as sort of like how buying guns around here isn't seen as much of a big deal, but when you buy body armor... you're clearly looking to enter a situation where you expect to get shot at.That makes YOU the aggressor. At least that's the way law enforcement sees it.
Avatar
There is already.Have an escort in corp with a stasis web. One faction web can make a large ship go to warp immediately. Have a second player/box with a logi standby to make ganking even more expensive.Have your own people or a multibox to help you. Why shouldn't multiple players be able to rape a single player in a PvP oriented game?
Avatar
You want a "siege module"? Have a friend in a logi rep your shields. No new buffs eeded.
Avatar
Freighters are not the actual root of the problem. The root of the problem is all the group planning and setup that gank squads are allowed to do. Therefore, the only solution is to remove the social element and give every player in EVE their own private instance. Let's call them Privateer instances! Yes! Privateer on the Frontier, where everyone can be Elite! In Freespace. Everyone can be a Freelancer and run their games at X3 speed!Uh, did I miss any titles in that?
Avatar
let me tell you a story about 3 oneiros and 2 guardians who didn't save their friendly freighter.
Avatar
I'm glad you liked my AMA.
Avatar
How else would Bat country buff their killboard.
Avatar
I see the low effort posting has already started.
Avatar
Please tell us more.
Avatar
Honestly, there is no real way to prevent it apart from not hauling at all. Our out of corp hauling alt lost a freighter with a scout and a rapier for webs, they just happened to get the point on it before the webs.
Avatar
Again, as someone who runs these ganks, you are wrong. We get about 7 cycles off.
Avatar
As long as you double wrap, you don't have much to worry about as the scanners cannot penetrate.
Avatar
Yes there is. Double wrap. Present the least attractive target.
Avatar
I have done this on the test server and never got more than two off--but that was just one T3. I had no idea pulling concord off would be that effective. I bet that will get nerfed--not saying it should. Seven cycles is enough to do something with an escort fleet then.You did suggest later in this thread that three logis could not save on freighter. I am curious how the oneiros and two guardians failed to save a freighter?
Avatar
In highsec you can still scout; and and escort fleets are worse in 0.0 than highsec.
Avatar
One of my only arguments against the practice of agressing a freighter with a noob alt so he can't log off and then bumping him for 30 mins while he can't warp off or log giving people infinite amount of time to get the ships they need to gank them.
Avatar
Escort fleets will be viable when the new kill rights system roll out.
Avatar
My suicide blackbird hit all its jams. 3xamarr, 3xgallente. We literally have planned ahead for everything. You need to try it with a talos in a 0.5. You have a lot of time to get cycles off. You only get 2 in a tornado, which is why we don't use them.
Avatar
I think he is trying to state that there are afk pilots being killed, since they land 15km off of gates rather than jumping on arrival, but that ignores your point that most aren't afk and instead get bumped.
Avatar
Did you miss the part where EVE Online is a PvP game?
Avatar
Terminus, IWar, Escape Velocity: Nova, Hardwar and Tachyon: The Fringe for a start.
Avatar
It takes 2-3 friendly blackbirds to completely negate any chance of a successful gank on you. Near impunity can also be achieved by webbing, though you are advised to tank your webbing ship. If you double wrap, miniluv may decide to try their luck anyway. Carry less than 3b and you will never be ganked without an ulterior motive (hostile logistics corp)
Avatar
It's not exaggeration when I say that it is completely possible within current game mechanics to not only make yourself an unattractive target for gankers, but near-ungankable even if someone chose to target you anyways. Especially if you have a JF.And no, I am not going to explain these on a public board. Figure out how to fly your ship properly, or lose it.
Avatar
ever heard of insta warping? ...bring along a friend or an alt, which webs your freighter as soon as you start aligning to the next gate.This way it's pretty hard to get ganked or even scanned.And with more experience you'll get better at it.
Avatar
There are 2 ways to ... use lets say ... the aggression system. the first is to suicide a scrub somewhere else to spawn concord and delay the response to the gank. The other is to suicide a noob on the freighter. The effect of this is the freighter has a 15 minute aggro timer, the simple option of logging off to avoid the gank is no longer possible. Rinse and repeat this step and you have unlimited time to organise the gank.
Avatar
Absolutely I loved it! It delivered everything a good AMA should bring: a unique perspective, interesting tidbits that those on the outside never knew, and you answered most if not all the inquiries directed at you. Despite being on the other side of your operation, I found it very informative and a fun read. Thank you again.
Avatar
I don't see any problem, even after thinking about it. I have a JF/F pilot that I've used extensively to and from Jita. I've APed almost every single time for years, and if I glance away from the news/cat pictures/whatthefuckever, I see that the vast majority of freighters alongside me are also warping to gates at 10km on AP.If I can't safely assume that a cargo isn't going to get to where I set an AP because it's 4b+ ISK,.. then I use a JF to bypass all that nonsense from the undock to a quiet, pre-scouted, low-sec border system. You don't even need all fives in jump skills to get almost all the way across empire in one or two jumps. Effort, a JF, Fuel, and PAYING ATTENTION are all parts of the cost of doing business safely. If CCP flat out removed AP from the game, I wouldn't lose a wink of sleep about it.
Avatar
Yes, I know what you meant and you are wrong. See Powersv2's comment. If we WERE destroying these in a single shot, we would be using artillery because that is much, much better than blasters for alpha, and so would cost less money.
Avatar
Props on you for admitting when you were in error. We don't have nearly enough of this in the eve online community.
Avatar
Hi sec is NOT hi sec as long as goons and other ashats can gank you without LONG TERM penalities. Period. Is why CCP no longer gets my money.
Avatar
Damn i'm glad i took the time to scroll through the comments today. full restitution for ganking? just priceless.
Avatar
Clearly you dont understand.By double wrapping, gankers are mislead and often think that there is some insanely valuable FW cashout or stack of PLEX, rather than, as the original comment says, something as cheap as a Drake.
Avatar
I believe a method called the double log off will actually get the freighter to safety in that situation. It has been called an exploit by some players but from what I have heard from miniluv they say fair play the freighter pilot deserved to get away
Avatar
I'm the fucking guy who runs these ganks. I know how we choose targets.
Avatar
3: this one is false. A ratter with 3b fitted to his ship is a juicy target and deserves to be blown up. similar to a freighter. they are meant to haul volume but not necessarily value. just because you can put more stuff into it, doesn't mean you should.
Avatar
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/co...Goons have ganked freighters with 4 logi and a webber before. Needing a 6+ man team to help you every time you need to move a freighter load of stuff around empire is getting absurd. And even then you're just presenting yourself as a bigger challenge for people who are all about overcoming creative challenges (and reaping the tears that come with success).
Avatar
Suicide drawing Concord doesn't work when bumpers can push you out indefinitely until their gank is ready. ECM doesn't work unless you can mass coordinate against ships that fit crazy amounts of ECCM and have ECM backup of their own. Counterattacks also require you to perfectly react against seconds long attacks staged at any time of your enemy's choosing. The Goons wouldn't be as successful as they are unless they had planned ahead for every contingency.
Avatar
Of course none of it is a guarantee, but they're all perfectly valid options, especially rolling with escort gangs. Unless you've got a monumentally good cargo haul, they're probably not going to take a run at you if you look like you've really got your shit together. Much like defending against any kind of for-profit ganking, it's all about making yourself as unattractive as possible. Anyone who tries to say that there aren't any options is just someone who wants to have their cake and eat it too.
Avatar
Just a thought, what about some kind of "suprise"-freighter, one that looks and gives sensor readings as freigher full of plexes, faction stuff and so on, but is in fact a camoflagued bc/bs. this would leave the freighters as vulnerable as they are, while adding some kind of risk to ganking, cause you cant be sure if its really that jucy freighter, just a bait flying 2 jumps ahead of the real frighter, or just a dude who flys around in it to ruin some gankers day.
Avatar
Freighters are the only ship in the game (unless I'm smoking crack) that can't be fit. In the past their EHP, cheapness, and good freighter practices largely protected them.Along with the addition of Tier 3 BCs, and the Blaster Buff we saw an increase in ganking at all levels (personal observation) Furthermore with mineral changes freighters now cost a good deal more than they used to. Those game changes decreased the amount of ships, and the cost of ships needed to gank freighters, orcas, and mission runners. (9 Brutix to kill a freighter, 8-9 T2 Catalyst to kill and Orca) I don't buy that changes to Concord have made ganking more difficult in net...that's ridiculous. With the cost increase to freighters, often many times, gankers are more willing to blow up freighters that won't even cover the cost of their gank squads because of the overall value number of the ship+cargo. AAA have been regularly ganking freighters in Uedama that were carrying a bill or less in cargo, which used to be a fairly safe amount to carry.I do not argue that there is an argument to be made for arbitrarily "nerfing" freighter ganking in hisec. However there is definitely room for an adjustment that takes into account other game changes "Tier 3 BCs", "Blaster Buff", "Mineral Changes" that were mechanic changes that had 2nd and 3rd order unintended changes to the way the game is conducted in practice.Most of the methods given in this article for preventing your freighter from getting ganked are more than a year old. This is largely propaganda that is no longer relevant. The threshhold of vessels/cost that used to be needed to gank a freighter have decreased signifigantly. What used to take 15 battleships now takes 9 Brutix; with increased hull prices and decreased thresholds, people are now more willing to hit freighters that may not repay gank costs. Bumping ships aren't necessary for non-morons who can time, make near safes, and fit points.Orcas are only an alternative for extremely high value cargos that take very little space, like BPOs. A very small amount of all goods moved in Eve are, or can reasonably be hauled by Orcas.(I'm not going to mention exploits involving arty tornados that goons repeatedly used in Jita to halve the cycle time of their arty, thus doubling the capability of small amount of tornados. Use of exploits is not reason for nerfing things)Freighters are the only ship in the game that can't be fit. This may be a feature that should be revisited. Allowing freighter pilots who are now paying 1.5b per ship, to fit a damage control or other mods to their ships would allow those who are willing to put time, and effort (not AFK freightering, using logical fits) as well as forego the benefits of cargo rigs and cargo extenders) to have an increased sense of control and survivability on par with other areas of the game. This is more in line with classic eve philosophy, than the status quo.The author of this article will say that things are fine like they are. This is not an invalid argument. Balance in gaming is largely opinion. I however point to EVERY OTHER aspect of the game where players are given the option to plan, fit, organize, and spend for more or less in game results. EVERY OTHER. However with freighters this is absent. You put an amount if your cargo that some people would not gank you for, and you set your ship on autopilot. Maybe it makes it, maybe it doesn't. Current mechanics and available gank ships make the choice of auto piloting or not, largely irrelevant.I'm writing this as someone who's game focus is on pvp, who organizes hisec Orca gank nights several times a month for community morale and lols.I'm not new to suicide ganking, and have been on the receiving end.
Avatar
if you can afford 20-50bil in cargo you can either afford a scout alt or to fund a corp of scouts working for you. Get a scout 1J ahead and there is simply no way you will get ganked. Forget autopilot, analyze map and be paranoid.
Avatar
We do tell ratters to fly cheap ships. Remember that 70b officer lvl4 nightmare? The unnecessary 10s of billions spent on that fit saved him perhaps a few seconds for each mission, maybe he had a little extra cap or used faction crystals more efficiently. But the trade-off was not worth it as he was a huge target. However it could be argued that from a fitting stance, he was merely maximizing the capabilities of the hull for the task at hand, like you seem to instinctively want to with freighters.Likewise, you might use all your resources to haul a freighter load of cheap fuel at once, but if you want to move expensive stuff a packed freighter is clearly the wrong choice. Nothing needs to change there other than your attitude. Make multiple trips, double wrap, or use orcas. I wouldn't be happy working with a hauler pilot who refused to do these things simply for the sake of minmaxing.
Avatar
"Deserve" to get away and "legal" are two different things. Certainly the double-logoff method seems like an exploit to me. Miniluv says these pilots "deserve" to live just because there's nothing they can do about it. They have no doubt already reported this to GMs (and continue to do so every time they see it), and they're definitely not shy about publicizing on EVE-O forums and here this practice exists.
Avatar
YOU choose targets for their scanned value. But that is just one target selection criteria. Another may be to target all freighters with a double-wrapped package. Or to target all empty freighters. Why? Just for shits and giggles, who cares why.
Avatar
Considering we are responsible for 1.75trillion isk in dead freighters, how we choose them makes all the difference in the world, since we're responsible for over 200 dead freighters in a 60 day period. Thanks.
Avatar
Plenty of ganked freighter killmails with friendly logi on them, obviously repping the ship. The ganker, however, has all the information ahead of time, and it is all known quantities. Assume all skills at 5. The freighter has a known and fixed amount of HP. Your ships are doing a known and fixed (in a narrow range anyways) amount of damage. You know how much a logi ship can rep in a cycle. Or 5 logi ships, as was shown on a recent killmail.But there are very limited options for improving the survivability of your freighters. You can have a webber with 2-3 webs on it for instawarp. Although a webber is another known quantity and can be ganked at the gate easily alongside the freighter for bonus lols in local. You can fly with a fleet booster to improve your tank and align speed (again, a quantity known to the gankers).The author of the article makes it sound like the solution is simple: carry less stuff to make the gank unprofitable (although plenty of ganks happen without the profit motive) and minimize losses. On the surface, a fair suggestion, like the others in his article (such as avoiding systems). The problem with these is that they are plausible enough, but on critical review are not practical. Avoiding chokepoint systems adds not 1 but 10 or more jumps to your trip, while still not providing any more safety. Between Amarr/Jita there are only two 0.5 systems EVERYONE needs to pass through. You literally can't avoid them. That's why they're called choke points.The fact is any level of organized EVE play requires the movement of massive amounts of cargo across space. A freighter-load is not a whole lot. Those who do not do any logistics for their corp/alliance simply have no idea how much stuff needs to be moved around. They would, if moving anything of moderate to high value required the mobilization of the entire corporation flying logi ships, shortly before everyone quit their corp and just logged in to do solo level 4s in the future.
Avatar
It's not absurd if they bring 4 times as many people to do it.Fact is that guy could have prevented being ganked by putting all the faction stuff in an Orca corp hanger and just hauled the ships in his freighter. Only needs two people, doubt the gankers would have looked at him twice.
Avatar
Also pods, shuttles, and Omens cannot be fit. ;)
Avatar
I haven't seen any freighter killmails with logi on them (which I'm sure has something to do with the fact repairs have never appeared on any killmails in any form).Things you can do...1. Scout these supposed bermuda triangles with another character2. Have friends logi freighters3. Web Freighters for insta-warp4. Plug in a Slave/Low-Grade Slave set (This one can't be known absolutely in advance)5. Gang Boost freighters (Also very difficult to know about in advance with off grid boosters and neutral toons.)6. Don't carry so much ISK in your hold.7. Train for, learn2fly, and invest in a JF to bypass all these super-duper dangerous choke points (or this one).That's not a short list of things you can actually do to minimise and/or eliminate your chances of being suicide ganked in a freighter. I'm about as willing to sit and count AFK freighters and calculating their survival ratio to prove a point as whiny freighter APer's are to actually pilot their ships. I know most of them are on AP, because I've been on AP right along side them for at least three years.
Avatar
Nintendo should nerf goombas because if I stand motionlessly, they walk into me and kill me. How about adding an infinite star powerup or something?
Avatar
Im not a member of Goonswarm, and I would in fact most likely be called a carebear. Sure Ive done a little pvp, but most of my time is spent gathering isk.That being said, please, for the love of everything EVE, STOP NERFING PVP. EVE is unique because it is a 'everywhere is a pvp zone'. If you make high-sec completely 100% safe, there wont be much reason to play EVE over other mmos like Guild Wars 2, other than spaceships.
Avatar
Ok, seriously, don't comment if you don't know what your talking about. It has been stated that they do not use alpha gank ships, they use blaster fit ships which are incapable of freighter alpha kills at low ganker numbers
Avatar
This is a bullshit thread. you are not impartial at all. why you even wasted your time writing this is beyond me. I stopped reading after 2 minutes. total crap.

Back when I wrote the conclusion to my series on why I believe the removal of risk in hisec would destroy EVE, I suggested that buffs to freighters would be an ominous sign about the direction CCP is taking the game. Almost on cue, we have seen a rise in "chatter" on EVE-O and elsewhere about the need to limit the ganking of freighters in hisec. This sort of chatter does not guarantee CCP will implement nerfs to freighter ganking. But every nerf to hisec aggression in the last few years has been preceded by the very same kind of whining. When complaints about a game mechanic reach a certain threshold, it's a fair bet the mechanic will be given a second look at CCP HQ. That makes it a worthy topic of discussion and analysis.

In today's post, I will examine the rationale for a nerf to freighter ganking, as well as the counter-arguments. In weighing the pros and cons, I will take care to be objective and give both sides a fair look. That does not mean, however, that both sides of the argument necessarily have equal merit. In this case, they certainly do not.

THE RISE OF FREIGHTER GANKING

 

I won't go into a full history of the ganking of hisec freighters, but here are the basics: Freighters have been suicide ganked in hisec for many years now, though the ganks tended to be infrequent. Performing the ganks used to be easier, prior to the buffs to CONCORD response time and the removal of insurance for gank ships. Freighter ganking was rare because it required a gank squad to suicide many ships simultaneously. Only the most ISK-laden, AFK-autopiloting freighter could attract such special treatment.

Earlier this year, Goonswarm & friends brought a ridiculous number of suicide ships to Jita one weekend and shot almost everything in sight. "Burn Jita" resulted in the deaths of many freighters, and carebear tears proliferated accordingly. However, Burn Jita was an aberration. To date, neither the Goons nor any other alliance have conducted a similar event.

Then came the "Ministry of Love". Goonswarm CEO The Mittani, always with a keen eye for emergent gameplay, created an organization dedicated to inflicting retribution on carebears who make bad forum posts on EVE-O. This group, better known by the abbreviation "Miniluv", developed a taste for hisec mayhem and eventually turned its attention toward killing freighters.

Miniluv proved successful. Suicide attacks against freighters used to be somewhat rare, but now freighters are dropping on a regular basis, often several times per day. Miniluv's notoriety has been enhanced thanks to the popular killboard website Eve-Kill.net, which highlights the five most expensive kills of the week on its front page. Normally the honored positions would be reserved for supercapitals, but now they are often occupied by Miniluv's freighter kills.

Enemies of the Goons may groan that yet again, the Goons are hogging the spotlight. I can only reply that there is no law against other groups developing emergent gameplay of their own.

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF LIMITING FREIGHTER GANKS

At this point I would love to describe compelling, thoughtful arguments in favor of a nerf to the practice of freighter ganking. It would no doubt improve my image as an impartial moderator of this debate. Unfortunately, there simply aren't any good arguments for such a nerf. And I won't pretend there are, since creating a false sense of balance serves no one.

Just because there aren't any good reasons for a nerf to freighter ganking doesn't mean no one supports a nerf. After all, good reasons aren't the only kind of reasons. So let's take a look at the most popular reasons why some people believe freighter ganking should be nerfed.

I realize that it's generally unfair in a debate to criticize people or their motives, rather than the substance of their arguments. In this case, there is no substance to attack. So I'm quite comfortable providing this section as an explanation for those who are curious what's going on. As far as I can tell, there are basically three groups of players who support a nerf:

 

  1. The Carebears. Disgruntled bears who lose freighters unsurprisingly feel their freighters shouldn't be blown up in the future. Everyone else who believes hisec should be a risk-free theme park lend their shoulders to be cried upon.
  2. The Knee-Jerkers. Some people instinctively feel a nerf is in order whenever they see anything interesting. If it's happening, it needs a nerf. A bunch of expensive freighters are exploding? Time for a rebalance. As the name implies, this is merely a matter of stimulus-response; there's no thought involved.
  3. The Jealous. These are similar to the knee-jerkers, but they only care because the high value of the kills and the fact that they are not the ones being credited with them. Far from being carebears, these are often PVPers. When they see someone else getting big kills, they feel their own efforts look small by comparison, and they want a nerf. Anyone motivated by a dislike of Goons also falls into this category.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH MAKING FREIGHTER GANKS DIFFICULT?

I would like to specifically address one argument that can be made in favor of a nerf to freighter ganking. The argument in question applies to this nerf, but it can also apply to virtually any other nerf up for debate. I call it the More Challenge Fallacy. I have no doubt that you'll be seeing this fallacy used again and again in the future, in EVE and elsewhere. The More Challenge Fallacy will now be debunked here, at no extra charge!

The argument goes something like this: "What's so bad about making it difficult to kill expensive freighters?" Or, "Would it be such a big deal to add a little extra challenge?"

From a propaganda point of view, I almost admire the simple elegance of this fallacy. It contains no substance, but it is difficult to rebut - unless you're already familiar with the fallacy, in which case it becomes trivial.

The reason the fallacy works is that no one wants to argue against the idea of tasks in video games having some challenge. If you're against making it a bit more difficult to kill freighters, it sounds like you want freighter killing to be easy. And what kind of wimpy gamer would be in favor of that? It almost makes it sound like the person opposing the nerf is a carebear, instead of the other way around.

When it comes to ganking freighters, there's much more to say about the question of difficulty (see below). Here's the universally appropriate response to the More Challenge Fallacy:

Every nerf carries with it a corresponding buff. If you nerf freighter ganking, you buff freighters (or more particularly, AFK freighters on autopilot carrying too much loot). Because a nerf to one thing is always a buff to something else, the More Challenge Fallacy can always be turned on its head: "What's so bad about making it difficult to go on autopilot through a trade route patrolled by gank squads, in a 20 billion ISK piñata, while AFK - and survive a highly-organized attack?"

Challenge is a good thing. That's why I see no reason to make it less of a challenge to do something really, really stupid (see, e.g., the AFK 50 billion ISK freighter in Uedama) without risking consequences.

Of course, balancing the difficulty level of various tasks is a legitimate part of game design. But it must always be anchored in some context or have some basis of comparison to something else. The More Challenge Fallacy is free-floating. You can nerf something on Monday and ask why it's bad to make it more challenging on Tuesday. If someone's argument in favor of a nerf sounds like this:

"Aw, what's the matter, the poor baby doesn't want to lose his easy _______? A bloo bloo!"

...then it's a fair bet you're dealing with the fallacy, not a proper balance argument. Simply insert the nerf's corresponding buff into the blank and send it right back at him.

 

HOW EASY IS FREIGHTER GANKING?

To help avoid the More Challenge Fallacy and put things into their proper perspective, let's take a quick look at the basic ingredients used by freighter gankers over the years:

Gankers pick a target system along a popular trade route and pre-spawn a ton of CONCORD squads away from the gate. They're likely to pick a 0.5 security system, as this maximizes the time they can attack before being jammed. A freighter can avoid death by avoiding the target system, which will be obvious from public killboards.

Gankers need to have one or more pilots scanning the cargo of freighters traveling toward the system. Then they need to estimate the value of the cargo to ensure it's worth the loss of all suicide ships, the risk of failure, plus the risk of the Loot Fairy frowning upon them. Freighters can avoid being attacked by not carrying too expensive a load. If they're going to be AFK-autopiloting anyway, what's wrong with taking multiple trips?

The freighter must be trapped while the attackers get mobilized. This means one or more extra pilots with bumping ships to keep the freighter away from the gate and out of warp alignment. The gank squad must determine precisely how much damage output they're going to need in order to kill the target. Freighters have around 170-200 thousand effective hitpoints. For a suicide gank target, that's a lot. The gank squad needs to know exactly what each of its members is bringing and how much damage they're capable of dishing.

If the damage calculation is off — even by a little — they're going to lose hundreds of millions of ISK with nothing to show for it. Execution matters. A high-DPS setup uses weapons with very short ranges. If anyone is out of range, or even if someone forgets to overheat their guns, that could be the difference between success and failure.

Additional members of the squad are needed to loot the freighter wreck. This may involve quick choices about what the hauler can and can't carry. The gank squad looters must race against opportunists who could grab the loot for free. Someone else in the squad may be designated to loot all the tech II gear left behind by the fallen gankers.

Note all the different moving parts involved. What I've just described involves around 20 different pilots minimum, all performing their tasks perfectly. A failure at any stage scraps the entire operation.

But it also means a freighter ganking organization needs a fair amount of manpower in reserve. Suppose, for example, only 19 of the 20 needed pilots are online and ready to respond when the cargo scanning pilot announces a juicy target. The gank cannot take place. It's rare to have 100% of an organization's members all playing at the same time — especially when "playing" means waiting around for a freighter to show up. At least several dozen members on the roster, and possibly upwards of a hundred, may be needed just to be able to consistently meet the manpower need on demand. This factor alone goes a long way toward explaining why freighters were not ganked on a regular basis prior to Miniluv.

 

THE DOG THAT DOESN'T BARK

Outsiders who call for nerfs make a judgment on how difficult a task is. Presumably anyone who supports a nerf to freighter ganking believes it's too easy to destroy high-value freighters in hisec. The trouble is they make that judgment without looking at everything that goes into a successful freighter gank. Instead, they look at killmails of dead freighters.

The killboards make freighter ganking look easy — it's just a list of successful kills, one after the other. Considering all the things that need to go right, I'm sure even a group like Miniluv has had its fair share of botched ganks. Failures, and the effort needed to overcome obstacles, are invisible on a ganker's killboard.

There is, however, a way to infer the challenge of freighter ganking: the absence of killmails from other groups of dedicated freighter gankers. It's the dog that doesn't bark. No one else is doing what Miniluv is doing. I'm sure there are plenty of EVE players who would enjoy taking part in the fun and profit of blowing up freighters with 20 billion ISK cargo. Yet no other organization has been created in all of EVE to replicate the Miniluv campaign. The only logical explanation is that it's too difficult.

I would offer this proposal to those who support a freighter ganking nerf: If it's so easy to do, go on a freighter killing spree of your own. If you can't pull it off, why not? If you can't do it, you can't nerf it.

Not only is Miniluv the only group repeatedly suiciding freighters in hisec at the moment, they're the only group in EVE's history to do it. Yes, freighters have been ganked before, but never on this scale. Miniluv's success can't be explained by new game mechanics, since changes to game mechanics have made freighter ganking more difficult/expensive in recent years. Nor has Miniluv uncovered some "trick" that makes it easier to do. It's purely a matter of organization and execution.

 

THE "GET OUT OF GANK FREE" CARDS

 

I've already alluded to a couple ways that freighter pilots can virtually zero-out the risk of being ganked in hisec. The Miniluv target systems are public knowledge, since the killmails are public. Freighters can avoid these systems with no effort on their part. Even if it means an extra jump or two on an alternate route, the freighter pilot is unaffected, since he's AFK autopiloting anyway. Lowering the value of cargo with multiple trips is no different from adding additional AFK jumps.

There's another easy way to avoid having a huge haul of loot get ganked on the way to the trade hub: fly an Orca. They're frequently used as cheap freighters; those Orcas you see warping from gate to gate most likely aren't on their way to or from a mining op. Orcas come with a corporate hangar and a ship hangar. These hangars do not drop loot when the Orca is destroyed, so gankers have no incentive to attack. Not only that, but the hangars are scan-proof. The Orca is essentially CCP's way of giving hisec players a gank-proof freighter. Now let's hope the Orca's advantages aren't used as an excuse to "rebalance" industrial ships by doubling freighter EHP.

Some people would say carebears shouldn't have to look at killboards, take steps to minimize risk, or do anything else that requires them to engage the EVE community. That's the philosophy of a single-player game. It makes no sense in an MMORPG. Everyone knows it takes far more effort to amass 20 billion ISK worth of cargo than it does to take a few simple steps to avoid losing said cargo. The refusal to adapt to the existence of other players may be caused by some kind of weird entitlement issue on the part of hisec carebears. If carebears want to "fix" or "rebalance" something, they can start with their attitudes.

 

THE FUTURE OF FREIGHTER GANKING

 

The carebears, knee-jerkers, and jealous players in EVE want to see the Miniluv freighter campaign brought to an end. They can't imagine watching tens of billions of ISK going pop in one freighter after another — not indefinitely. In their way of thinking, the story must have some kind of conclusion. As for me, I would be perfectly happy to see freighters suicide ganked from now until EVE shuts down.

My reasoning is simple. There's no reason why people who overstuff freighters and go AFK should expect to survive an organized attack. If a player goes idle in the middle of a battlefield in an FPS game, the soldier he's controlling will get sniped. That was true when the first FPS was created, it's true today, and it will continue to be true for as long as FPS games exist. There's no need to change it; no one would argue for a nerf to sniping stationary targets. If the Goons go on destroying expensive freighters indefinitely, it's because they've earned it. I say they should be allowed to keep on earning it for as long as the freighter pilots let them.

 

James 315
MinerBumping.com

 

James 315 has a distinguished history of combat in nullsec, mostly fighting against the Band of Brothers alliance, which was a bad alliance. Recently he has moved to highsec, where he currently serves as Father of the New Order and Saviour of Highsec