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
427
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 19:50:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Quote: The game does not, and can't really be made to, distinguish between them.
Yes it can.
Quote:No, I meant the thread in general. I've seen it brought up several times.
Ah well, I can only answer for myself not others. I tend to try not to speak for anyone else =)
Quote: Yes, blowing up his ship or ejecting does accelerate the loss. If his point is, as some have suggested, that it was unfair because they could bump him for so long, then accelerating the loss is in fact an acceptable option. But that isn't really what he wanted, what he wanted was immunity from the actions of others, which is clear in both his language in the OP (unedited, that is), and in his subsequent posts.
That brings the conversation into the realm of supposition to the point you would have to speak with the freighter pilot himself in that regard.
Quote:
Yes and no. He does have a shot, that being, not make himself a target in the first place, get someone to web him out, counter bumping, drawing it out long enough to make the bumping ships give up, or paying someone to shoot the wreck once he dies (which, btw, works really well, for the cost of a Rifter, some sebos and a few guns, you deny them any profit).
But, insofar as he is caught, and caught good, yes. He got caught by a larger number of players who prepared for the situation better than he did. He shouldn't have the advantage in such a circumstance. Planning, effort and superior numbers should be rewarded. In this case, they are rewarded with a very high chance of a successful gank.
Welllll that point is up for contention. I dunno about the planning part if you have people having to string aggression timers with noobships for an hour....
Also, again, more of a talk about preventive maintenance concerning the loss of his cargo, not the method in which it was lost.
Quote:
But it doesn't have to be noobships. That doesn't matter at all. They kept on attacking him. His timer kept on refreshing. That's it. Nothing about it is wrong. Pain in the ass, sure, but not overtly wrong.
It didn't "keep" getting refreshed is my point. Not in a constant stream like if it people constantly attacking. Again, more like they were only being used to manipulate the timer, and knowing that it would have to be repeated... free noobships were used. IF my insinuation is off base by all means let me know.
"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
|
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1498
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 20:40:00 -
[1142] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Murk, why do think it's an exploit or harassment because it lasted as long (and by long I mean a pretty short time, really - an hour is nothing) as it did?
Do you think there should be a special cut off time after which you can merely excuse yourself from the fight and leave without taking a loss?
I personally think that if someone manages to start and engagement with you while you're online and playing, then they should be able to finish what they started regardless of how long it takes, and merely logging off during the engagement should NEVER be what results in you escaping or winning.
I don't think ongoing fights should have any kind to time limit after which they are mechanically ended (such as via a log off) because that's crap. Currently, the time limit is technically until you reach downtime, I guess, but I don't see why we should go back to the old days of ships vanishing mid combat because the other guy decided he was losing and killed the client. That's just crap An hour is a long time if you need to string 15 minute timers together. By itself 60 minutes is not much by itself, but it is excessive to hold a ship in highsec with noobships. As much as you think it's "crap", it still comes down to it being a limitation everyone has the option of exercising. Like in a different post, I'm not talking about pulling the plug at a moment's notice.. but there does have to be a realm of plausability beyond downtime. Why? I don't think there should be. If you end up in an engagement, I think it's perfectly reasonable that you remain involved in that engagement until it ends 'naturally' - that is to say, you win the fight, you escape, or you lose the fight. Not "it's exceeded some arbitrary time limit, so now I am allowed to kill the client and get away scott free tee hee" So you're saying it's all or nothing right? You're equating balancing 1 hour of stringing logoff timers with noobships being the caveat of "getting away scot free"?
If you end caught in a fight then I do think that the fight needs to play out within the game rules - not be ended (and DEFINITELY not in a favourable way) by external means such as killing the client. You're kind of muddying the waters by harping on about the duration and by what ships may have been used. What ships they were in when refreshing the timer is irrelevant.
As for the reason it lasted an hour, that is because the freighter kept it going for an hour. He made the decision to spend that amount of time struggling to save his stuff - and that's fine, he's entitled to do that, and in slightly different circumstances his willingness to commit that amount of time very well could have saved him (giving his friends time to get blackbirds, or counter bumping ships, or anything else). If he hadn't been willing to commit that much time, he also could have done a number of other things to end it much earlier, such attempting to convo them and strike a deal, or even self destructing or ejecting.
So no, I do not think he should have a way to kill the client and disappear safely. Not when he found himself in a fight, and when he made the decisions to keep it going on that long, and when the decision to drag it out that long can, in many cases, be the winning move anyway (it just wasnt here because his corp mates are bad).
I honestly, truly can't understand why you think someone should be able to simply opt out of pvp and disconnect to save themselves. I really, really don't get that.
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
427
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:02:00 -
[1143] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Murk, why do think it's an exploit or harassment because it lasted as long (and by long I mean a pretty short time, really - an hour is nothing) as it did?
Do you think there should be a special cut off time after which you can merely excuse yourself from the fight and leave without taking a loss?
I personally think that if someone manages to start and engagement with you while you're online and playing, then they should be able to finish what they started regardless of how long it takes, and merely logging off during the engagement should NEVER be what results in you escaping or winning.
I don't think ongoing fights should have any kind to time limit after which they are mechanically ended (such as via a log off) because that's crap. Currently, the time limit is technically until you reach downtime, I guess, but I don't see why we should go back to the old days of ships vanishing mid combat because the other guy decided he was losing and killed the client. That's just crap An hour is a long time if you need to string 15 minute timers together. By itself 60 minutes is not much by itself, but it is excessive to hold a ship in highsec with noobships. As much as you think it's "crap", it still comes down to it being a limitation everyone has the option of exercising. Like in a different post, I'm not talking about pulling the plug at a moment's notice.. but there does have to be a realm of plausability beyond downtime. Why? I don't think there should be. If you end up in an engagement, I think it's perfectly reasonable that you remain involved in that engagement until it ends 'naturally' - that is to say, you win the fight, you escape, or you lose the fight. Not "it's exceeded some arbitrary time limit, so now I am allowed to kill the client and get away scott free tee hee" So you're saying it's all or nothing right? You're equating balancing 1 hour of stringing logoff timers with noobships being the caveat of "getting away scot free"? If you end caught in a fight then I do think that the fight needs to play out within the game rules - not be ended (and DEFINITELY not in a favourable way) by external means such as killing the client. You're kind of muddying the waters by harping on about the duration and by what ships may have been used. What ships they were in when refreshing the timer is irrelevant. As for the reason it lasted an hour, that is because the freighter kept it going for an hour. He made the decision to spend that amount of time struggling to save his stuff - and that's fine, he's entitled to do that, and in slightly different circumstances his willingness to commit that amount of time very well could have saved him (giving his friends time to get blackbirds, or counter bumping ships, or anything else). If he hadn't been willing to commit that much time, he also could have done a number of other things to end it much earlier, such attempting to convo them and strike a deal, or even self destructing or ejecting. So no, I do not think he should have a way to kill the client and disappear safely. Not when he found himself in a fight, and when he made the decisions to keep it going on that long, and when the decision to drag it out that long can, in many cases, be the winning move anyway (it just wasnt here because his corp mates are bad). I honestly, truly can't understand why you think someone should be able to simply opt out of pvp and disconnect to save themselves. I really, really don't get that.
That's because you are assuming my answers. Nowhere did I mention anything about what you are harping about, and everything you are mentioning I have also mentioned as being worthy of a petition, which would also be another "option" that freighter pilot has at his disposal.
So yea, I can see where you would have trouble "really really getting that" as it is not what I'm saying at all.
"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
|
E-2C Hawkeye
State War Academy Caldari State
230
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:09:00 -
[1144] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Murk, why do think it's an exploit or harassment because it lasted as long (and by long I mean a pretty short time, really - an hour is nothing) as it did?
Do you think there should be a special cut off time after which you can merely excuse yourself from the fight and leave without taking a loss?
I personally think that if someone manages to start and engagement with you while you're online and playing, then they should be able to finish what they started regardless of how long it takes, and merely logging off during the engagement should NEVER be what results in you escaping or winning.
I don't think ongoing fights should have any kind to time limit after which they are mechanically ended (such as via a log off) because that's crap. Currently, the time limit is technically until you reach downtime, I guess, but I don't see why we should go back to the old days of ships vanishing mid combat because the other guy decided he was losing and killed the client. That's just crap If we were talking fights I might be inclined to agree, but we are not talking fights. We are talking about people taking advantage of a bumping mechanic. I donGÇÖt disapprove of the tactic of getting bumped to stop me from getting back to the gate. The guy is there they engage I get bumped I get blown up. I really donGÇÖt think any of you forum babies arguing this is working as intended would be ok with getting bumped for an hour should the tables be reversed. Sure your going to say you are because you want to argue to keep your broken game mechanic which probably canGÇÖt be fixed by ccp anyhow. The best we could hope for is that they label it as harassment or exploit after a given point or time. We are talking fights. You just don't want to admit that it is, like it or not, a valid fight. Fights, particularly in EVE, aren't fair. It doesn't mean it isn't a fight, and it sure as hell doesn't mean you should be able to kill the client to escape from it. PVP is not consensual. You can throw ad hominem as much as you want, and make up statements attributing made up behaviours and reactions to us all you want, but it just makes your argument seem even weaker if you resort to those things.
Consensual or not it doesnt matter. What does matter is there is no fight until the freighter is aggressed so the mechanic of bumping does not produce aggression. Anyone should not be allowed to waste an hour or more of my time with no aggression.
Bump me if you need to but do it in what should be deternibed by ccp as an acceptable time frame then blow me up and let me get on with my game.
Keeping me tied to game with no aggression timer and no options after a certain point should be defined as griefing per CCP.
|
Callyuk
Thundercats The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:35:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Posted: 7/6/2013 9:48:00 PM GM Luthor Hello jedijed,
Thank you for contacting customer support.
At this time ramming into ships of other players to immobilize them is not considered harassment or an exploit, as it is not a violation of the EVE Online rules and policies. Therefore in accordance with our policies we are unable to interfere in this matter.
If you have any additional questions or matters we can assist with, please let me know.
Best regards, GM Luthor CCP Customer Support | EVE Online | DUST 514
In other words GM Luthor didn't look into the petition at all it was simply a reply to the title of the petition
Super Fail Ass Customer Support 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 |
Callyuk
Thundercats The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:46:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Posted: 7/6/2013 9:48:00 PM GM Luthor Hello jedijed,
Thank you for contacting customer support.
At this time ramming into ships of other players to immobilize them is not considered harassment or an exploit, as it is not a violation of the EVE Online rules and policies. Therefore in accordance with our policies we are unable to interfere in this matter.
If you have any additional questions or matters we can assist with, please let me know.
Best regards, GM Luthor CCP Customer Support | EVE Online | DUST 514
In other words GM Luthor didn't look into the petition at all it was simply a reply to the title of the petition
Super Fail Ass Customer Support
I have another petition in also , that is still open i will escalate it if i can . 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 |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1501
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 21:57:00 -
[1147] - Quote
It's astonishing to me that you even petitioned it when it is so very, very clearly an acceptable event. It's also rather impressive that you're still going to try and escalate it even though we've told you for nearly 60 pages why its fine, pointed to all the relevant statements by CCP, and you yourself have now been directly told by GMs that its ok.
Some people are just completely belligerent and unwilling to accept that they just lost.
It wont be long now before they claim they're vanishing off to play WoW, and EVE is doomed to fail as a result of this heinous cruelty |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1184
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:02:00 -
[1148] - Quote
no when the gms clearly and specifically said bumping was not an exploit they were obviously joking
those kidders, am i right? hahaha |
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
2268
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:04:00 -
[1149] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:It's astonishing to me that you even petitioned it when it is so very, very clearly an acceptable event. It's also rather impressive that you're still going to try and escalate it even though we've told you for nearly 60 pages why its fine, pointed to all the relevant statements by CCP, and you yourself have now been directly told by GMs that its ok.
Some people are just completely belligerent and unwilling to accept that they just lost.
It wont be long now before they claim they're vanishing off to play WoW, and EVE is doomed to fail as a result of this heinous cruelty
A forum page for every minute.
A laugh for every ISK lost.
And yes, quoted GM responses are clearly defined as against the rules.
So what we have here is basically an exploiter complaining about exploits. He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
405
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:06:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Violation of forum rules removed by Kaarous
...
In other words GM Luthor didn't look into the petition at all it was simply a reply to the title of the petition
Super Fail Ass Customer Support
In other words, you didn't like the answer, so you attempt to escalate it. Please tell us when that fails, I really want closure on this. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
|
SmokinDank
Horizon Research Group
15
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:09:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Callyuk wrote:Posted: 7/6/2013 9:48:00 PM GM Luthor Hello jedijed,
Thank you for contacting customer support.
At this time ramming into ships of other players to immobilize them is not considered harassment or an exploit, as it is not a violation of the EVE Online rules and policies. Therefore in accordance with our policies we are unable to interfere in this matter.
If you have any additional questions or matters we can assist with, please let me know.
Best regards, GM Luthor CCP Customer Support | EVE Online | DUST 514
In other words GM Luthor didn't look into the petition at all it was simply a reply to the title of the petition
Super Fail Ass Customer Support I have another petition in also , that is still open i will escalate it if i can .
Wasting CCPs time and breaking the forum rules in one go, well done. Remind me again why we need more people like this around?
|
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
2270
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:12:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Let's get this thread up to 3600+ posts so we can have:
A POST FOR EVERY SECOND THIS COMEDY WENT ON! He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15128
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:13:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:**GM correspondence removed, as per forum rules.**
In other words GM Luthor didn't look into the petition at all it was simply a reply to the title of the petition
Super Fail Ass Customer Support Not only do you not understand game rules, you don't understand forum ones either.
Let us know how this pans out for you. We won't laugh, honest.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
15129
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:17:00 -
[1154] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Consensual or not it doesnt matter. What does matter is there is no fight until the freighter is aggressed so the mechanic of bumping does not produce aggression. Anyone should not be allowed to waste an hour or more of my time with no aggression.
Bump me if you need to but do it in what should be deternibed by ccp as an acceptable time frame then blow me up and let me get on with my game.
Keeping me tied to game with no aggression timer and no options after a certain point should be defined as griefing per CCP.
How does someone keep you tied to the game, with no aggression timer? Are they cloaked and AFK when they do this? We would all love to know.
Oh and CCP has ruled, guess what........
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
2270
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:24:00 -
[1155] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Consensual or not it doesnt matter. What does matter is there is no fight until the freighter is aggressed so the mechanic of bumping does not produce aggression. Anyone should not be allowed to waste an hour or more of my time with no aggression.
Bump me if you need to but do it in what should be deternibed by ccp as an acceptable time frame then blow me up and let me get on with my game.
Keeping me tied to game with no aggression timer and no options after a certain point should be defined as griefing per CCP.
Honestly, if you're being kept tied to Eve Online for an hour longer than you intended because some guys were setting you up for a loss you didn't have the friends or the skill to prevent, I suspect you've got other issues besides the game mechanics of bumping spaceships on the internet.
If you're going to take a loss anyway, why stay logged in? Why not go outside to reflect on the joys of life instead of wallowing in the extension of your own defeat?
Bumping is not an exploit.
Addiction seems be a powerful motivator. In this case it's motivating you to believe you're being griefed when in fact you are just being beaten. Learn to walk away.
That's, in all honesty, the best advice you can get, given what is written here. He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Jonah Gravenstein
Balius and Xanthus Traditional Gunsmiths
9846
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:29:00 -
[1156] - Quote
SmokinDank wrote:Callyuk wrote:Callyuk wrote:Posted: 7/6/2013 9:48:00 PM GM Luthor **Redacted because it breaks the rules**
In other words GM Luthor didn't look into the petition at all it was simply a reply to the title of the petition
Super Fail Ass Customer Support I have another petition in also , that is still open i will escalate it if i can . Wasting CCPs time and breaking the forum rules in one go, well done. Remind me again why we need more people like this around? So that we can laugh at them every time they post, they have no other use apart from the potential comedy threads.
Why shouldn't we be able to rob people of their valuables for profit? |
Callyuk
Thundercats The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:29:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Well you are all right so far :) In game rules you got me there. I don't think anyone would have seen the aggression by noob toons coming. And no i don't know the forum rules since im not a forum ***** and this is my first time (other than Char Brazzar) on the forum since i started playing eve i'm learning them one ban at a time. As for the petition i still think they (how about abused instead of exploited) the mechanics. Since its been confirmed by CCP there was no exploit lets use abused instead . 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 |
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
2270
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:34:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Well you are all right so far :) In game rules you got me there. I don't think anyone would have seen the aggression by noob toons coming. And no i don't know the forum rules since im not a forum ***** and this is my first time (other than Char Brazzar) on the forum since i started playing eve i'm learning them one ban at a time. As for the petition i still think they (how about abused instead of exploited) the mechanics. Since its been confirmed by CCP there was no exploit lets use abused instead . Nope.
They USED the game mechanics. Say it with me. No, not, "Abused."
"Used." There, good.
Regarding the forum rules. They are posted and easily accessible at the top of EVERY PAGE. You can write, so you're obviously literate. Read the rules before you break the rules. Sort of like how, regarding this thread's OP Topic, you would have benefitted greatly from reading the rules in the first place, too, before playing the game. He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Callyuk
Thundercats The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 23:29:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Im just going to wait on the reply from the next petition . If they say everything is legit im not going to try to escalate it etc. I will start ganking freighters tho and get my isk back . This will be my last post . Im done with the forums for now . 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 |
WonkySplitDemon
Red Dawn Mercenaries
20
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 23:32:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Im just going to wait on the reply from the next petition . If they say everything is legit im not going to try to escalate it etc. I will start ganking freighters tho and get my isk back . This will be my last post . Im done with the forums for now .
hahahahahaahahahahhahahaahaha |
|
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
2612
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 11:37:00 -
[1161] - Quote
I have deleted some posting of GM communication from this thread. EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative GÇ+ EVE Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
187
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 11:40:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Callyuk wrote:Im just going to wait on the reply from the next petition . If they say everything is legit im not going to try to escalate it etc. I will start ganking freighters tho and get my isk back . This will be my last post . Im done with the forums for now .
Huzzah!
Hear Hear!
Well Said! |
Sheshou Huxunan
Indie Capsuleer Incorporated
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 12:24:00 -
[1163] - Quote
Next time, activate Quit or Log Off from the settings menu so that you may trigger an "emergency warp".
If you do not know what this is:-
Emergency Warp Protection for players who have disconnected unintentionally for any reason.
Your ship is warped to an inaccessible location, at which point your ship is unavailable (account offline). Subsequently, upon logging in, you are auto-warped to the location of your disconnection.
There is an exception such that, if you disconnect mid-warp, you are returned to your warp-origin rather than your warp-destination.*
*This may have changed as it has been a while since I experienced the feature mid-warp.
NOTE WELL: "Emergency warp" is only effective for those who are not already affected by some an aggression timer that has anti-warp or anti-log off properties, such as a "Criminal Timer" in high-security space. |
Dopey Leeroy
Thundercats The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:36:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Message History
GM Dagon Posted: 7/9/2013 10:18:00 AM GM Dagon Greetings, GM Dagon here.
Thank you for contacting Customer Support. I apologize for the delayed response but we are currently seeing a heavy load of incoming support tickets which results in a slower response time than normally. We appreciate your patience.
Regrettably as GM Luther explained in your other support ticket, the players were not exploiting when they bumped your ship and eventually destroyed it. As such we will not be able to intervene on your behalf by granting a reimbursement.
To answer your question in regards to making use of rookie ships to maintain aggression, in EVE Online players are allowed to open fire upon each other for whatever reason. Doing so in high security space has its consequences as players will lose their ships to CONCORD in addition to taking a penalty to their security status. This is however the extent of the punishment they receive and players shooting other players for the purpose maintaining aggression is not considered an exploit.
If you have any further questions or concerns regarding the matter then please do not hesitate to contact us again.
Best Regards, GM Dagon CCP Customer Support | EVE Online | DUST 514 jedijed Posted: 7/8/2013 9:43:00 PM jedijed ARE NOT in the buisness of ganking jedijed Posted: 7/8/2013 9:42:00 PM jedijed Ok i Closed the last petition. then GM Luthor responded to it :( In my petition i said i was bumped for an hour and i thought it was an exploit and apparently it isnt. Ok so on to the next bit. Is using Rookie ship Noob alt toons to keep me aggressed for an hour an Exploit ? So as not to hide anything , Im posting the response on the forums in a 58 page thread since all of us in EVE that are in the buisness of Ganking people dont know this **** is going on until its too late.
jedijed Posted: 7/3/2013 5:43:00 AM jedijed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdq5in9fR-Y
This is the full HD video
And this is the final verdict . It is Over. Let the Freighter Ganks Begin :) I have enough Alts to do solo freighter Ganks so when i have time to get setup I will Be Getting my Gank on :) Peace out |
Dopey Leeroy
Thundercats The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:38:00 -
[1165] - Quote
Dopey Leeroy wrote:Message History GM Dagon Posted: 7/9/2013 10:18:00 AM GM Dagon Greetings, GM Dagon here. Thank you for contacting Customer Support. I apologize for the delayed response but we are currently seeing a heavy load of incoming support tickets which results in a slower response time than normally. We appreciate your patience. Regrettably as GM Luther explained in your other support ticket, the players were not exploiting when they bumped your ship and eventually destroyed it. As such we will not be able to intervene on your behalf by granting a reimbursement. To answer your question in regards to making use of rookie ships to maintain aggression, in EVE Online players are allowed to open fire upon each other for whatever reason. Doing so in high security space has its consequences as players will lose their ships to CONCORD in addition to taking a penalty to their security status. This is however the extent of the punishment they receive and players shooting other players for the purpose maintaining aggression is not considered an exploit. If you have any further questions or concerns regarding the matter then please do not hesitate to contact us again. Best Regards, GM Dagon CCP Customer Support | EVE Online | DUST 514 jedijed Posted: 7/8/2013 9:43:00 PM jedijed ARE NOT in the buisness of ganking jedijed Posted: 7/8/2013 9:42:00 PM jedijed Ok i Closed the last petition. then GM Luthor responded to it :( In my petition i said i was bumped for an hour and i thought it was an exploit and apparently it isnt. Ok so on to the next bit. Is using Rookie ship Noob alt toons to keep me aggressed for an hour an Exploit ? So as not to hide anything , Im posting the response on the forums in a 58 page thread since all of us in EVE that are in the buisness of Ganking people dont know this **** is going on until its too late. jedijed Posted: 7/3/2013 5:43:00 AM jedijed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdq5in9fR-Y This is the full HD video And this is the final verdict . It is Over. Let the Freighter Ganks Begin :) I have enough Alts to do solo freighter Ganks so when i have time to get setup I will Be Getting my Gank on :) Peace out
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
407
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:39:00 -
[1166] - Quote
In what way was this not explained to you, that posting GM communications is thoroughly against forum rules?
The ISDs are going to swallow you whole. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Templar Knightsbane
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:41:00 -
[1167] - Quote
Dopey Leeroy wrote:To answer your question in regards to making use of rookie ships to maintain aggression, in EVE Online players are allowed to open fire upon each other for whatever reason. Doing so in high security space has its consequences as players will lose their ships to CONCORD in addition to taking a penalty to their security status. This is however the extent of the punishment they receive and players shooting other players for the purpose maintaining aggression is not considered an exploit.
I think this quite clearly spells out that using a rookie ship to keep someone agressed is also not an exploit! |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
428
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:12:00 -
[1168] - Quote
The GM has spoken.
Time to find a new topic =) "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
|
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
2859
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:14:00 -
[1169] - Quote
This is the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on my friends. Some players started posting in it not knowing what it was, And they'll continue posting in it forever just because . . .
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'Hodor'. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3604
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:15:00 -
[1170] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:This is the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on my friends. Some players started posting in it not knowing what it was, And they'll continue posting in it forever just because . . . This is the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on my friends. Some players started posting in it not knowing what it was, And they'll continue posting in it forever just because . . . This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
|
|
|
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 |