Solution for Ganking

Depends on what you mean by "paper ships". To make a decent cargo sized trade ship able to stand up to an alpha strike from a well kitted combat ship you'd probably need to put so much defences on it you'd have little room left for cargo.

This hasn't been my experience. I've taken an Alpha strike from station camper at a CG in a G3 engineered Type-9, and still had more than enough health to land safely. Of course, I don't fly like I'm trying to get shot, but all I had to sacrifice was 32 tons of cargo for a 6A shield, and that is what I would do normally because it greatly reduces the risks I take by flying fast.

I can only imagine what my future Imperial Cutter, fully engineered to G5 with a prismatic shield, will be able to do... assuming that I ever get around to acquire one. I enjoy flying medium and small ships far more than the largest ships, so it's never been high on my priority list. At least with PowerPlay 2.0, I'm actually rocketing through the Earl rank due to all the donation missions I've been completing, while still managing to break even. ;)
 
My point was, even if you're not flying a paper ship, if its a big hauling ship, doesn't really matter if you go to all those lengths to add defence, you're still going boom before you can even high wake, so might as well not even bother. Have more cargo space. The chances of getting ganked are pretty low, so reap the benefit while you can, and then the occasional gank you're still way ahead than you would be if you had sacrificed cargo space for bigger shields and HRPs/MRPs/SCBs.

Personally, if it's reached the point where I need to high wake while under fire, then I've failed repeatedly long before the interdiction attempt started. Especially in this day and age, where Supercruise Overdrive is a thing. The most dangerous stage of my journey has always been entering/leaving a station, and until recently I've never had to leave a station under hostile fire. I now have a viable strategy for that scenario, so it won't be a problem in the future.
 
The Cutter shouldn't be the be all end all cargo ship anyway. I've broken through a 3 wing 12 ship station blockade with mine once, just to test it, and it has only got an old legacy thermal resistant class 5 prismatic.
 
My point was, even if you're not flying a paper ship, if its a big hauling ship, doesn't really matter if you go to all those lengths to add defence, you're still going boom before you can even high wake, so might as well not even bother. Have more cargo space. The chances of getting ganked are pretty low, so reap the benefit while you can, and then the occasional gank you're still way ahead than you would be if you had sacrificed cargo space for bigger shields and HRPs/MRPs/SCBs.
A prismatic cutter can definitely last long enough to wake out, and I haven't tested it but a fast shieldless might be able to get enough distance to be hard to catch before waking. You do lose a chunk of cargo space for the shield or range for the armour to be able to survive shieldless. Which i don't particularly like but as long as solo exists then I don't need to worry about that too much. I use my mouse build when I want to play cat and mouse and play solo when I want to be max throughput
 
I'm pretty sure Rebel Yell's CMDR would survive, more often than not.

We could put it to the test!

Would want proof that the big trade ship he's flying does actually have mainly cargo space though, not HRPs/MRPs/SCBs. Would need to agree to something like minimum % of max possible cargo space, otherwise you might as well be flying something smaller and faster. (Cutter is a bit of an outlier here due to its speed vs size as well as its MLF, and i would probably recommend a cutter to anyone doing trade in dangerous areas if they need bulk, but sometimes people just want to fly something different, like a Type 9... wierdoes).

I'd also want to compare the results from something like one of my frag ships along with a competent PvPer trying as well in their typical gankmobile.


Personally, I won't play a character that just assumes he's going to survive every ship loss, so avoiding ship loss is something I prioritize much more highly than cargo delivered, CG placing, BGS conflicts, credits, or almost anything else in-game...except those times I am setting my character aside to do wholly out of character testing/experimentation, in which case none of that other stuff matters either. I mean, my CMDR is willing to take risks, but without breaking that forth wall, there is a big difference between knowing the ejection-microjump sequence is very reliable, and knowing it will literally never allow anyone to come to harm. I know the latter is true, but my CMDR cannot.

Ah, not breaking the fourth wall. Well, if that's your thing, then sure.

That ship would likely survive one pass of a frag boat, if you're moving evasively. The problem is that you (and your subsystems) can be targeted right away, for optimal convergence, and if they have FSD disruptors, you are probably going to catch one as they have a lead indicator and you don't have PDTs.

Moving evasively is a bit of a misnomer for the biggest ships. :D

Why would you not have PDTs? All my trade ships have at least half of their utility slots full of them, sometimes all of them. I also have plenty on my combat ships, since when shields drop, you just know you're going to get targetted with missiles, especially in combat zones, and they can ruin your day.

Most gankers suck and you'd probably survive one encounter, but someone competent catches you while you're flying those configs, its a rebuy screen, unless you're very lucky. Only the best gankers aren't slowed down by not being able to target their opponents, which is why I don't like shields on most of my traders...I can't use them if I'm silent, and there often aren't any utilities to spare for heatsinks.

Well, maybe do i overestimate the competence of gankers.
 
Could you post some builds, via Coriolis or similar?

My cmdr is an open only trader/smuggler and I've always ran shields but maybe I don't need to?

Of course, you could consider that once you've been interdicted you've already lost - the skill is avoiding being interdicted in the first place.

I think the best way to survive in Open is to practice avoiding interdictions and learning how to high wake.

Sadly this advice to some seems to be a "gitgud har har", but quite frankly I have always seen ganks and the like as challenges to overcome rather than a reason not to play in Open, certainly NPCs provide zero challenge.

Its not bad advice. For example, high waking the moment you see a player approaching, not waiting to see if you are interdicted.

Then switch to solo, return to the system, and taunt the player via system chat with "LOL, just switched to solo." :D
 
This hasn't been my experience. I've taken an Alpha strike from station camper at a CG in a G3 engineered Type-9, and still had more than enough health to land safely. Of course, I don't fly like I'm trying to get shot, but all I had to sacrifice was 32 tons of cargo for a 6A shield, and that is what I would do normally because it greatly reduces the risks I take by flying fast.

I can only imagine what my future Imperial Cutter, fully engineered to G5 with a prismatic shield, will be able to do... assuming that I ever get around to acquire one. I enjoy flying medium and small ships far more than the largest ships, so it's never been high on my priority list. At least with PowerPlay 2.0, I'm actually rocketing through the Earl rank due to all the donation missions I've been completing, while still managing to break even. ;)

That's cool. I'd want to see the loadout of the ganker though of course. Looking at those numbers, as long as i was close enough, even with resistances, your shields would go pop on the first volley from my fragship. After that...

The Cutter is a different beast though. Its speed can make it hard to keep up with for many ships and it can't be mass locked. Really is a dream of a trade ship. However, if flying into known danger, i'd prefer the Clipper for its speed and good SC handling as you stand a chance of beating interdictions in it. But then, you're losing a lot of cargo space.
 
Personally, if it's reached the point where I need to high wake while under fire, then I've failed repeatedly long before the interdiction attempt started. Especially in this day and age, where Supercruise Overdrive is a thing. The most dangerous stage of my journey has always been entering/leaving a station, and until recently I've never had to leave a station under hostile fire. I now have a viable strategy for that scenario, so it won't be a problem in the future.

Good point. SCO is a game changer.
 
My point was, even if you're not flying a paper ship, if its a big hauling ship, doesn't really matter if you go to all those lengths to add defence, you're still going boom before you can even high wake, so might as well not even bother. Have more cargo space. The chances of getting ganked are pretty low, so reap the benefit while you can, and then the occasional gank you're still way ahead than you would be if you had sacrificed cargo space for bigger shields and HRPs/MRPs/SCBs.
Cutter/T9 ships can be engineered to survive most of gank attempts (my PP 1.0 T9 fortifiers was super slow but has 3+k hull and nearly 1k shields), didn't experiment the T8 so far. Isn't only hauling, most "paper" ships are passenger/exploration ones. The Federal Corvette is also a nice armoured cargo... but yeah there's not "gank proof" build, as outcome depends also on opponents' numbers, builds etc
 
How much shielding would be sufficient ? My T9 runs with 993 MJ raw and good resistances, my T8 with 1234 MJ raw and good resistances. Both are fully dedicated cargo ships with max capacity. I don't fly open though.
That shield on T9 is what you need but has to be combined with some good hull numbers, reinforced drives [as they are super exposed] and fast reboot shielded FSD (I don't have a T8 so didn't try/test it). If I am not wrong decent survivable builds were holding around 600t of cargo.
 
Cutter/T9 ships can be engineered to survive most of gank attempts (my PP 1.0 T9 fortifiers was super slow but has 3+k hull and nearly 1k shields), didn't experiment the T8 so far. Isn't only hauling, most "paper" ships are passenger/exploration ones. The Federal Corvette is also a nice armoured cargo... but yeah there's not "gank proof" build, as outcome depends also on opponents' numbers, builds etc

Type 8 does have that lovely stable SCO drive in its favour.
 
That shield on T9 is what you need but has to be combined with some good hull numbers, reinforced drives [as they are super exposed] and fast reboot shielded FSD (I don't have a T8 so didn't try/test it). If I am not wrong decent survivable builds were holding around 600t of cargo.

600t is reasonable. A cutter with a size 6 shield (and i'd never run a Cutter without shields anyway... bumpity bump against the slot) is only 120t more.
 
Cutter/T9 ships can be engineered to survive most of gank attempts (my PP 1.0 T9 fortifiers was super slow but has 3+k hull and nearly 1k shields), didn't experiment the T8 so far. Isn't only hauling, most "paper" ships are passenger/exploration ones. The Federal Corvette is also a nice armoured cargo... but yeah there's not "gank proof" build, as outcome depends also on opponents' numbers, builds etc

Relatively Gank proof 560 tons Haulervette. Here with a nasty Phasing-sequence Configuration.


Also I didn’t kill a Ganker in her, several clogged, wake away or startet to talk (which is ok for me) - and of course it does not attract all Gankers, because it does not look like an easy target. And in the times of the Frag-build Python MK2, it has enough shield to high wake out when it turns out bad. Was destroyed by a wing, though.
 
Type 8 does have that lovely stable SCO drive in its favour.
I'd compare this to other mediums (Python for instance), looks slow but viable (FSD is shielded fast boot, drives are reinforced / drag):
1733324279529.png
 
Could you post some builds, via Coriolis or similar?

My CMDR's current T-9 setup looks something like this:

I usually slap some guns on it so I can kill NPCs, but the loadout depends on what i can spare.

It's a shorthaul trader/mission runner for BGS work, so i don't really care that the jump range is crap...I just want to keep a lucky shot to the FSD from triggering a malfunction right away. The SCO is a new addition to this setup that I use mostly to break out of gravity wells.

In general, if I'm hit with a CMDR tether, I'll make sure I have my escape jump selected (always have a route plotted), then I'll submit and go silent as I boost away from my jump target, flip to face my attacker (so I can more effectively engage any munitions with the PDTs), then try to boost laterally past them while dumping a sink or two (they'll try to target as they get within resolve range, ideally they waste a fraction of a second trageting a sink). By this time the FSD short cooldown should be about up and i'll start charging my FSD the straighten out to jump, popping the ECM if I still see munitions on sensors. Of course, that's just the general idea...I can adapt to an evolving scenario on the fly. Anyway, unless my attackers are really on the ball, I'm able to jump.

The moment I hit the destination system, I manually kill the thrusters or FSD in the module pane to force a drop from SC to ensure my CMDR cannot be followed. Then I asess the situation. If I still have missions/cargo that I need this ship for, I'll see if I have any allies in the area who can screen my next approach (usually by attacking my attacker just before I renenter the system). Otherwise I weight how much the cargo is worth (in influence) and how likely I am to make it to my destination before either trying again or abandoning the area to run missions at my B-site.

My CMDR's Corvette trader is just his standard combat loadout with all the biggest optionals swapped out for cargo racks. For medium ships I usually use a Krait MkII, which I run shieldless, with relatively skimpy protection, as it's speed is it's main defense.

My cmdr is an open only trader/smuggler and I've always ran shields but maybe I don't need to?

Shield generators are big and ships without a lot of base shielding need a bunch of boosters.

HRPs stop at class 5. The larger ships don't have to sacrifice that much cargo to get quite a large pool of hull integrity. And if you don't have a shield generator, you get to put the more fun countermeasures in all your utility slots.

Of course, you could consider that once you've been interdicted you've already lost - the skill is avoiding being interdicted in the first place.

It takes a string of failures to lose a ship, but only one success in that chain of events to escape. I'm assuming, for this discussion, that one has been hit with that interdiction tether and decided to submit instead of risk that long cooldown on the outcome of the tunnel game (which I am personally no match for an experienced ganker in).

Moving evasively is a bit of a misnomer for the biggest ships. :D

Even a T-9 that is moving right is much harder to kill than a T-9 that is moving wrong, or not at all.

Anything more nimble than a T-9, evasion really starts to matter.

A couple of examples...

First interdiction in that video had one ship with FSD disruptors, second had two. Clearly the PDT was shooting them down, but a PDT is not a purely passive defense; making sure it's pointed at incoming munitions (and knowing where those munitions are going to be coming from) is critical to it's effectiveness. In this particular scenario, I was aided by the fact that DG had their FSD disruptors distributed suboptimally (the Cutter is a bad platform for dumbfires, unless the target is running away in a straightish line, which I am not going to do in a slower ship), and hindered by my custom galaxy map settings making it impossible for me to load the systems I could jump to faster than the DG wing could (meaning I had to evade them way more than I hoped I would need to...that video is just a segment of this encounter).

That second video isn't a ganker, just a CODE pirate not adverse to a challenge. My CMDR was never at risk, but I still think it's a good example of the benefits of manuver (in this case to protect my cargo), even in a large vessel.

The ship I was using the first video obviously has shields...it was the multi-purpose vessel I used to accompany DW2 before I diverted to Colonia. Same ship is in the second video, but I pulled all the shielding in favor of more cargo and countermeasures as ran missions. That's when I ran into Harry Potter and Deathdingo, who must have decided chasing me around Colonia was more entertaining than taking shots at the increasingly slim explorer pickings.

Why would you not have PDTs? All my trade ships have at least half of their utility slots full of them, sometimes all of them. I also have plenty on my combat ships, since when shields drop, you just know you're going to get targetted with missiles, especially in combat zones, and they can ruin your day.

If we're talking about ships with relatively weak base shielding and relatively few utility slots (which includes most of the Lakon ships), the PDT is much more of a trade-off. Shields are a much less situational defense, so if one is going to use them on these ships, going all in on them may be the best bet.
 
I don't think that's the case. It's more about the loss of (game-)time than the loss of credits.

If credits are the issue for you, you can level up in Powerplay to ignore most rebuys with the 100% cost reduction if killed in one of your systems or by somebody pledged to a different Power.
I'm not worried about credits, it's just more of an inconvenience being interdicted over and over and over when you're trying to do something. It's annoying as hell. I can get away from most gankers. But when I'm 20 LS away from a station and it takes me 15 to 20 minutes to get there just because I'm getting interdicted constantly. That takes a lot of the fun out of the game. And I can understand if I had something valuable and they wanted it. But this is just to simply blow your ship up for the fun of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom