Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
424
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:42:00 -
[661] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Callyuk wrote:
of course it is for you :)
The day you catch a war target in a freighter while flying a frigate solo you will understand
Wouldn't a wartarget just be scrammed and held through active means and also not have Concord involved? "Never rub another man's rhubarb." -Joker in Batman (Jack Nicholson) Just get a catalyst, blow him up and the post in local "Just a friendly reminder that I'm mining here and not you." -Abrazzar
|
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
78
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:42:00 -
[662] - Quote
Tippia wrote:There are plenty of counters, but I suspect that you took two words out of context to read it as if there aren't.
Naw, context is pretty much how I remembered it:
Tippia wrote:Epikurus wrote:I'm not familiar with the mechanics of this but the big question seems to be whether there is any effective counter. Is there anything at all that a solo freighter pilot can do in this situation to avoid being killed or is death a foregone conclusion the moment the attack is initiated? If it's executed flawlessly and without outside interruption, the victim is pretty much dead, as he should be. As illustrated, it's a fairly complex set of actions that need to be taken in a co-ordinated fashion between a number of people GÇö as with most such things, a single player's main option is to try to not find himself in such a situation to begin with. With freighters, in particular, this is best done by not being a worth-while target.
Quote:which was answered in full
No it wasn't.
Quote:While you're at it, why not answer all the other questions you've skipped?
You're not interesting enough to talk around in circles with, sorry. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
15386
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:42:00 -
[663] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Point 1- Yes, freighters ARE special. The do not have all the functionality othyer ships do in regards to having an aggression timer applied to them. Just because they have no slots doesn't mean they are treated any differently than other ships, and being without slots doesn't make them special either.
So why should they have special leave to ignore mechanics that were specifically in place to put an end to a kind of abuse that freighters were often using?
Quote:Freighters are most definitely not like any other ship in the game, except shuttles (yes shuttles can have an aggression timer too, but that is an entirely different topic isn't it?). It's not so much a different topic as proof that they're not special. And hell, even if they were, why should they be given special rules to dictate their survivability when one of the main purposes behind the new timers were to take away that ability?
Quote:I do not agree with Tippia to say it takes DAYS to become "excessive". You yourself said that is not possible (downtime) and that GM/DEVs have final say. You can keep bumping people for days, at which point it becomes excessive and the GMs will start to inquire into your intentions. What's not possible is to keep bumping and refreshing PvP timers for days. In fact, it's the impossibility of the latter that lets the former slide into the realm of harassment if it happens for the wrong reasons: because you're doing something a number of days when there's no reason or benefit from keeping it up for that long. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
317
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:43:00 -
[664] - Quote
Tippia wrote:and yet, the rules for the timers (from both players and NPCs) are the same no matter where you are, and there's still no reason why it should be any different. Combat has been made consistent, which means that there are no special rules for highsec any more. Blinders don't change that fact, and asking for them to be made inconsistent again requires some pretty good reasons GÇö none have been given. Oh, and no, CCP does not look dimly at can flipping. What on earth gave you that idea? No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game. That is the total opposite of consistent. In low or null you can go weapons free and there is not the certainty of losing your ship. In high sec the only way to stop them is to suicide into them. That is not consistent. That means there are also special rules in play because of the zone you are in. AND, it is not even a true deterrent that they won't just come back at you again in a new ship causing you to have to suicide against them again. Either make them legally attackable or it should be deemed an exploit.
Look, I have no idea why you are defending this infinitely ridiculous game mechanic, but it is making you look infinitely ridiculous. SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac |
baltec1
Bat Country
7212
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:44:00 -
[665] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:
Maybe because they had no efficient countermeasure?
Right...
So a whole alliance did not have anyone able to fly logistic ships, insta canes/zealots/anything with medium guns, blackbirds, anything fitted with webs? Sounds like a terrible alliance that the freighter pilot should leave. |
Elizabeth Aideron
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:44:00 -
[666] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:Tippia wrote:There are plenty of counters, but I suspect that you took two words out of context to read it as if there aren't. Naw, context is pretty much how I remembered it: Tippia wrote:Epikurus wrote:I'm not familiar with the mechanics of this but the big question seems to be whether there is any effective counter. Is there anything at all that a solo freighter pilot can do in this situation to avoid being killed or is death a foregone conclusion the moment the attack is initiated? If it's executed flawlessly and without outside interruption, the victim is pretty much dead, as he should be. As illustrated, it's a fairly complex set of actions that need to be taken in a co-ordinated fashion between a number of people GÇö as with most such things, a single player's main option is to try to not find himself in such a situation to begin with. With freighters, in particular, this is best done by not being a worth-while target. Quote:which was answered in full No it wasn't.
what part of "outside interruption" dont you understand |
baltec1
Bat Country
7212
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:46:00 -
[667] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:baltec1 wrote:Callyuk wrote:
of course it is for you :)
The day you catch a war target in a freighter while flying a frigate solo you will understand Wouldn't a wartarget just be scrammed and held through active means and also not have Concord involved?
Where is the difference?
Both parties are holding down the target till they kill them. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
15386
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:48:00 -
[668] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:Naw, counter is pretty much how I remembered it: Tippia wrote:GÇ£Is there anything at all that a solo freighter pilot can do in this situation to avoid being killed or is death a foregone conclusion the moment the attack is initiated?GÇ¥
If it's executed flawlessly and without outside interruption, the victim is pretty much dead, as he should be. GǪso in other words, there are plenty of counters and I never said otherwise
Yes it was, and you couldn't mount any argument against the answer other than positing that GÇ£it's not the same thingGÇ¥ to which the current question is GÇ£how so?GÇ¥ (both paraphrased). You have yet to answer this question.
Quote:You're not interesting enough to talk around in circles with, sorry. Of course you are. It's all you do, after all. If you're actually not interested in doing so, here's a tip: just stop. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
baltec1
Bat Country
7212
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:48:00 -
[669] - Quote
Schalac wrote: No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game.
Holding a target in high sec till you can kill it
Holding a target in low sec till you can kill it
Holding a target in null sec till you can kill it
Holding a target in wormholes till you can kill it.
Where is the difference here? |
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
78
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:54:00 -
[670] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:S Byerley wrote:
Maybe because they had no efficient countermeasure?
Right... So a whole alliance did not have anyone able to fly logistic ships, insta canes/zealots/anything with medium guns, blackbirds, anything fitted with webs? Sounds like a terrible alliance that the freighter pilot should leave.
They bring in reppers, you still sit there bumping him for as long as you feel like.
Counter-attacking the the cats has similar problems.
As evidenced in this case and others, webs are generally not sufficient once the bumping has started.
Their best option would presumably be to counter-bump the Mach's, but trying to fly sufficient ships in when you could potentially finish your gank at any time is (I suspect) generally not worth it. |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
424
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:57:00 -
[671] - Quote
Neuntausend wrote:Nothing kept the pilot from logging off and doing something with his life, the outcome would have been the same either way.
In the end, it's just another ship loss and an hour wasted. Station camps, bubbles, heck, even just 2 gate-jumps and a long warp in 10% tidi can easily cost me an hour. Are those exploits and harassment as well now? Just eject, podex and get on with your life next time, will save you 58 minutes.
That's pretty much saying "you can avoid car accidents by not driving, therefore we don't need to make cars safer".
Good luck with that. "Never rub another man's rhubarb." -Joker in Batman (Jack Nicholson) Just get a catalyst, blow him up and the post in local "Just a friendly reminder that I'm mining here and not you." -Abrazzar
|
Callyuk
Thundercats The Initiative.
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:57:00 -
[672] - Quote
Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :) How Goons Gank Freighters with the new flagging system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdq5in9fR-Y https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=254193&p=25 Theres a gear at the bottom right in every YOUTUBE video use it |
Elizabeth Aideron
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:59:00 -
[673] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :)
im pretty sure i know how were making up for that and it doesnt involve highsec freighters |
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
78
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 17:59:00 -
[674] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪso in other words, there are plenty of counters and I never said otherwise
Context silly. You said that he(not his alliance) didn't do anything when you said yourself there was nothing he could do.
Nope; wasn't.
Quote:Of course you are. It's all you do, after all. If you're actually not interested in doing so, here's a tip: just stop.
With other people, about interesting things; you don't measure up. |
baltec1
Bat Country
7213
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:02:00 -
[675] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:
They bring in reppers, you still sit there bumping him for as long as you feel like.
Counter-attacking the the cats has similar problems.
As evidenced in this case and others, webs are generally not sufficient once the bumping has started.
Their best option would presumably be to counter-bump the Mach's, but trying to fly sufficient ships in when you could potentially finish your gank at any time is (I suspect) generally not worth it.
Wrong.
Ganking these things is a fine line, start taking us out with defensive ships, jamming us or just repping means we will give it up and go after something easier.
They had an hour, a gift from god to most people, to get a defensive fleet to him and they didn't even try. There is only one person to blame for this lasting as long as it did and that's the pilot of that freighter.
Even just bringing webbing ships would have made a difference as it is entirely possible to get aligned with something in the time it takes the macks to burn out turn around and fly back in.
Demanding huge game breaking changes to the game because a handful of players are terrible is no argument. |
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
78
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:03:00 -
[676] - Quote
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:Callyuk wrote:Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :) im pretty sure i know how were making up for that and it doesnt involve highsec freighters
Can't be going all that well with all the whining and conspiracy nonsense everyone was posting yesterday. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
15386
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:05:00 -
[677] - Quote
Schalac wrote:No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game. How is it in any way more free? If they don't aggress you (and thus die), you can get out of it at zero effort. Compare this to low or null, where they can keep you stuck at no effort 'til downtime.
Quote:That is the total opposite of consistent. It's been made very consistent: no matter what you fly and where, if you get into combat, you can't escape by logging off. There are no special cases of GÇ£having done X to A so therefore B can do Z to C for N minutes because of rules clause PGÇ¥ GÇö there are just five states of legality, four states of aggression, and a very distinct set of rules to get yourself (and only yourself) into any of these states. These states and their corresponding timers are the same all over the place with no exception to ensure that you always understand what they entail.
Quote:Look, I have no idea why you are defending this infinitely ridiculous game mechanic What's ridiculous (much less infinitely so) about it?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
78
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:06:00 -
[678] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:jamming us or just repping means we will give it up and go after something easier.
Your laziness doesn't really change the dynamic; though it does shed light on why you're so defensive.
Quote:Demanding huge game breaking changes to the game because a handful of players are terrible is no argument.
Good thing no one is.
|
Elizabeth Aideron
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:08:00 -
[679] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:baltec1 wrote:jamming us or just repping means we will give it up and go after something easier. Your laziness doesn't really change the dynamic; though it does shed light on why you're so defensive.
ganking is always balanced for laziness in some sense. defense against ganking for mining barges is fitting a tank because it requires more people and expense to gank them |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
15386
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:10:00 -
[680] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:Context silly. You said that he(not his alliance) didn't do anything when you said yourself there was nothing he could do. Context, silly. I said that once the attack has begun (i.e. he's already done a number of mistakes and missed a couple of counters), the remaining outs require outside help (i.e. it can still be countered), and even then, he can capitalise on mistakes the gankers make (giving him a few more counters).
So in other words, there are plenty of counters and I never said otherwise.
So your only counter-argument is GÇ£nu-uhGÇ¥. We can therefore safely conclude that it is the same thing and that you cannot think of even the slightest shred of an argument to the contrary. Goodie, surrender accepted. Thus, your question has been answered in full, and it's your turn to start providing answers to all the other questions that have queued up in the meantime.
So: why did the OP let the gankers keep him there for an hour and do nothing to help himself?
Quote:With other people, about interesting things; you don't measure up. Of course I do. You keep at it, after all. If you're actually not interested in doing so, here's a tip: just stop. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
424
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:13:00 -
[681] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:S Byerley wrote:Tippia wrote:GǪaside from determining intent, which will be required if it is to be classified as harassment. Citation needed. How on earth are you still acting like intention isn't key? I'll present two really simple situations for you to mull over: Before we start, lets remember that if I kill the freighter, that is legitimate use of the tactic: I have destroyed someone elses assets, possibly profited from it, etc. So it's absolutely, unarguably valid if I kill it at the end. It is *possibly* harassment if I don't kill it, and instead just keep it stuck without purpose. Situation 1: I bump a freighter for one hour with my mach just as pure harassment (theres of course an entirely different argument about what constitutes harassment - a single instance, even if it lasts an hour, would not, in my opinion, but thats not relevant right now - lets assume it is). After the hour, I leave, satisfied. Situation 2: I bump a freighter for one hour with my mach as I intend to kill it. I'm waiting for buddies of mine to get themselves online and in catalysts and get to gate. Something important pops up (wife, phonecall, powercut, whatever) that causes/forces me to leave the game, letting the freighter escape despite my intentions to eventually kill it. Without making a judgement about my intent, and without being able to know the factors outside the game itself, how would you determine which one is harassment and which isn't? Hint: You can't
Would the catalysts still be at the gate waiting? "Never rub another man's rhubarb." -Joker in Batman (Jack Nicholson) Just get a catalyst, blow him up and the post in local "Just a friendly reminder that I'm mining here and not you." -Abrazzar
|
baltec1
Bat Country
7213
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:14:00 -
[682] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:though it does shed light on why you're so defensive.
Yes, the fact that it is very easy to defend a freighter from a gank and that your ideas will damage the game.
You are literally trying to patch stupid. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
318
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:14:00 -
[683] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Schalac wrote: No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game.
Holding a target in high sec till you can kill it Holding a target in low sec till you can kill it Holding a target in null sec till you can kill it Holding a target in wormholes till you can kill it. Where is the difference here? How they are held, and the process that you can go about countering the person that is holding you. In low, null and WH you can shoot the target without the certainty of losing your ship. In highsec if you shoot the target you WILL lose your ship. That is the biggest difference you can possibly get. SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac |
Callyuk
Thundercats The Initiative.
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:19:00 -
[684] - Quote
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:Callyuk wrote:Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :) im pretty sure i know how were making up for that and it doesnt involve highsec freighters
It dosent involve fountain either LAWL
How Goons Gank Freighters with the new flagging system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdq5in9fR-Y https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=254193&p=25 Theres a gear at the bottom right in every YOUTUBE video use it |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
15386
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:20:00 -
[685] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Would the catalysts still be at the gate waiting? In situation 1: no, because they're not actually involved in what's going on. In situation 2: no, because many of them are outlaws and won't undock until the target is in the kill box.
Schalac wrote:How they are held, and the process that you can go about countering the person that is holding you. In low, null and WH you can shoot the target without the certainty of losing your ship. In highsec if you shoot the target you WILL lose your ship. That is the biggest difference you can possibly get. GǪbut that difference is countered by the fact that in high, you can just log off to counter the whole GǣholdingGǥ bit, which leaves you about as free there as everywhere else. To counter this, the holders will have to do something they don't need to do in low or null, which is to lose a ship of their own, at which point it's definitely not Gǣmore freelyGǥ than elsewhere.
Quote:If bumping is combat then make it an aggressive act and flag them for retaliation. If not then it is an abuse of game mechanics and should be deemed an exploit to do so constantly while in high sec. It's not combat, so that part is easy. However, why should it be deemed an exploit? It's an intended game mechanic that has been specifically and explicitly deemed not and exploit, and it has plenty of counters. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
318
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:20:00 -
[686] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Schalac wrote: How they are held, and the process that you can go about countering the person that is holding you. In low, null and WH you can shoot the target without the certainty of losing your ship. In highsec if you shoot the target you WILL lose your ship. That is the biggest difference you can possibly get.
Show me a freighter with guns. I'm going to block your posts because you are just a troll. Peace, bal.
SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac |
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
78
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:21:00 -
[687] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Context, silly. I said that once the attack has begun.
Context, silly goose. You said it was his fault for not doing anything while they held him for an hour, not before they started holding him.
Quote:We can therefore safely conclude that it is the same thing and that you cannot think of even the slightest shred of an argument to the contrary.
Or that I'm echoing your own obstinance in a concise manner; I like my explanation better.
Quote:Goodie, surrender accepted.
Sorry to disappoint, but declaring your own victory doesn't incite me. (just trying to save you some trouble)
Nope. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
318
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:23:00 -
[688] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Would the catalysts still be at the gate waiting? In situation 1: no, because they're not actually involved in what's going on. In situation 2: no, because many of them are outlaws and won't undock until the target is in the kill box. Schalac wrote:How they are held, and the process that you can go about countering the person that is holding you. In low, null and WH you can shoot the target without the certainty of losing your ship. In highsec if you shoot the target you WILL lose your ship. That is the biggest difference you can possibly get. GǪbut that difference is countered by the fact that in high, you can just log off to counter the whole GǣholdingGǥ bit, which leaves you about as free there as everywhere else. To counter this, the holders will have to do something they don't need to do in low or null, which is to lose a ship of their own, at which point it's definitely not Gǣmore freelyGǥ than elsewhere. Using a rookie ship on a throwaway alt is hardly a penalty compared to the amount of people and firepower needed to suicide a mach or two. SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
424
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:23:00 -
[689] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Also, have you not seen that big thread about bumping? I'm sure it's been linked numerous times. The gist of that thread pretty much does indicate that bumping, if it's for some legitimate purpose, is valid.
You can make the font bigger if you have a hard time reading the screen
Here's the problem with that. Miner bumping is not used ion the same way. Miner bumping is to encourage the miner to leave. Freighter bumping is to keep the ship from leaving.
Intent CAN be proven, simply by the actions of the target (log of warp being clicked for instance).
Now, since you CAN data mine that freighter spamming warp, you can infer intent. "Yes, as you can see by the number of times I was spamming my warp shortcut and right clicking with my mouse, I was trying to get away".
But you cannot prove intent by the bumper except for hitting the approach key. You know he wanted to bump, but that's all.
(By the way, this is why I first replied that miner bumping was a terrible example when it first came up).
Now, since we know the differences of intent, we can then look to the differences of intent, in regards, to harassment.
For instance, we do know, by GM declaration, that harassment was decided by following the miner, from system to system while continuing to bump. This is in regards to knowing you are bumping a miner from a rock so he cannot mine it, to which a simple recourse is to leave the system and find somewhere else.
Using that same model (but in reverse since freighter bumping is meant to KEEP the ship in system, not force it out), continually NOT letting that freighter to leave would be deemed harassment since that freighter was then pushed around multiple grids in system (proven by Concord placement and vectors of such) as well as kept from the gate and gate guns and not able to leave. Approach versus Warp/jump, as the command given to facilitate the harassment.
Before this gets argued, we already know bumping is not illegal. Yes yes we know this. The act by itself did not get the freighter killed.
It was a combination of mechanics that led to what looks like 1 specific instance of how those mechanics, when used in combination, by manipulating current mechanics to reduce risk of the ganker and increase risk of the freighter that relies specifically to highsec's mechanics.
Of which was used to what looks like a matter of excess to the point of harassment.
"Never rub another man's rhubarb." -Joker in Batman (Jack Nicholson) Just get a catalyst, blow him up and the post in local "Just a friendly reminder that I'm mining here and not you." -Abrazzar
|
baltec1
Bat Country
7214
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 18:24:00 -
[690] - Quote
Schalac wrote:I'm going to block your posts because I have no argument that stands. Peace, bal.
Fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |