EVE Search - Name and Shame: Triumvirate Coward

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

Name and Shame: Triumvirate Coward

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nerogk Shorn Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy SCUM.	Posted - 2009.06.06 19:57:00 - [1] So my friends and I were roaming in 0.0 and a Dominix pilot by the name of Tudum Zagorac warps to the gate we were sitting on. He jumps, and we follow him. We are in a Moa, Ferox, Ferox and Cyclone. My Moa manages to point him (he started out 31km away. I know. I'm awesome.) And we get on top of him and start chewing through his armor. I bump him, and he isn't even trying to get back to the gate, so he's a good 17km off. After about 30 seconds of shooting him his ship disappears. I've been playing for a while so i'm familiar with this trick. He logs off his character and logs on another on his account and his ship disappears even while being aggressed. After a minute or 2 he logs back on and immediately logs back off. He does this 3 or 4 times in order to get his emergency warp in away from the gate. I had no idea Triumvirate taught these cheap exploits to their members. Maybe he just didn't want to get owned by our lawl fit fail ships. Either way it is embarassing, cowardly, and previously i've only seen it been used by frightened carebears. It's a little sad to see it done by a member of a "respectable" pvp alliance. Triumvirate has certainly lost some of my respect if they allow their pilots to pull this. It's been petitioned, but i don't really think much can be done. The Bulbasaur Wizard D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S
Morel Nova z3r0 Gravity YARRR and CO	Posted - 2009.06.06 20:27:00 - [2] wait, logging on an alt makes the other character instantly disappear??? Put in space whales!
Michael Corinthos	Posted - 2009.06.06 20:36:00 - [3] Edited by: Michael Corinthos on 06/06/2009 20:36:54 Whether what the OP says about logging in a same account alt is true or not, what happened here is the battleship jumped through and immediately logged off. BEFORE aggression. Then, he was pointed, which stopped his emergency warp... for 30 seconds. At which point, instead of emergency warping (which it couldn't do, because it was pointed), his pointed ship simply disappeared. Nothing special or post-worthy about this, just the average, common, every-day, run-o'-the-mill logoffski. Nothing to see here.
Lexa Hellfury Incura	Posted - 2009.06.06 22:10:00 - [4] Posting in a "someone logoffskied" thread Originally by: RedSplat The Forum moderation Software known as Mitnal became self aware. CCP had no choice but to shut it down.
Garmon Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.06.06 22:11:00 - [5] Left cow lexa? signature locked for inappropriate language. ~EVE Community Team
Garmon Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.06.06 22:17:00 - [6] and yea, Tri has no HONOUR, the other day I was in mostly harmless space camped in, a tri vaga convo'd me and asked me if he can help me kill them, I invited him to gang and he warped to me and shot me then died
Suitonia Gallente Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.06.06 22:30:00 - [7] They really ought to fix logoffski.
DmitryEKT AMMO INC	Posted - 2009.06.06 22:53:00 - [8] OP is blatantly lying. We've tested this extensively, logging on an alt WILL NOT MAKE YOU DISAPPEAR. Either the guy logged off before you aggressed him, in which case 30 seconds is the disappear timer, or you're lying. There is no possible alternative.
Michael Corinthos	Posted - 2009.06.06 23:35:00 - [9] Originally by: Garmon and yea, Tri has no HONOUR, the other day I was in mostly harmless space camped in, a tri vaga convo'd me and asked me if he can help me kill them, I invited him to gang and he warped to me and shot me then died That's hilarious. And Lexa joined FW.
Jimer Lins Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.06.06 23:46:00 - [10] I'm working on an update to the article in my signature, but in a nutshell, you can catch logoffskis if you're patient and have a smartbombing/ECM burst - fitted covert ops. Also, the part about logging on another character is incorrect. It doesn't remove the original character's ship from space. It did once but that hole was fixed a long time ago. What you experienced was the mechanic that states no aggression can be attached to a pilot if they are disconnected. So even if you hit someone who just jumped through a gate, they don't get the aggro timer if they CTRL-Q'd before the aggro (usually while still under gatecloak or even during the session change). So their ship just poofs out of existence after 30 seconds- it can't e-warp because it's pointed but it still vanishes.
Zenethalos Minmatar Noir.	Posted - 2009.06.07 01:45:00 - [11] As jimer stated there are ways to catch the b@stards but its tedious and you need to be setup before hand. It's pathetic that this is what eve is coming to, we see it a lot in our line of work. Well sometimes more then others. It would be great if CCP would put there heads together and come up with a way to combat this sort of mechanic, but alas we get moar content with minimal fixes.
Lady Karma	Posted - 2009.06.07 01:52:00 - [12] Edited by: Lady Karma on 07/06/2009 01:53:44 I not sure what is funnier, the ops misunderstanding of logging off without aggression, or his attempt to call another player a coward for not engaging a gank squad. Loggoffski is lame, but he lived, you got annoyed enough to write a thread. I think he probably happy now. Originally by: Nerogk Shorn It's been petitioned, but i don't really think much can be done. It's idiots like you cluttering up the petition queue that screws it up for everyone else.
Jimer Lins Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.06.07 02:06:00 - [13] Edited by: Jimer Lins on 07/06/2009 02:06:19 Originally by: Lady Karma Edited by: Lady Karma on 07/06/2009 01:53:44 I not sure what is funnier, the ops misunderstanding of logging off without aggression, or his attempt to call another player a coward for not engaging a gank squad. Loggoffski is lame, but he lived, you got annoyed enough to write a thread. I think he probably happy now. Originally by: Nerogk Shorn It's been petitioned, but i don't really think much can be done. It's idiots like you cluttering up the petition queue that screws it up for everyone else. No, it's cowardly ****s who can't accept the consequences of their actions in the game that create petitionable situations. Always petition logoffskis. Eventually, CCP will realize that something must be done. They may not respond to individual petitions but they can see trends. Corp killboard-How to Kill Logoffskis
Lady Karma	Posted - 2009.06.07 02:12:00 - [14] Originally by: Jimer Lins Always petition logoffskis. Eventually, CCP will realize that something must be done. They may not respond to individual petitions but they can see trends. I hope you are trolling. Encouraging people to file useless petitions, :NOIR:
Havoc G D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.06.07 03:48:00 - [15] pls shut your face..
Jimer Lins Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.06.07 04:11:00 - [16] Originally by: Lady Karma Originally by: Jimer Lins Always petition logoffskis. Eventually, CCP will realize that something must be done. They may not respond to individual petitions but they can see trends. I hope you are trolling. Encouraging people to file useless petitions, :NOIR: It's not useless. Logoff exploits are a cancer of this game, contributing to the idea that you can play EVE on easy mode. GMs need to step the ** up and ban people who pull logoff crap. Logoffski is only one of the many issues that are ignored by CCP because there's no easy way to address it with their current tools. The only way to fix that situation is to make enough noise about it that they fix. the. god. damn. problem. Ignoring it on the grounds that it makes their job harder? Don't even bother telling me that it's plugging up the queue. Petitioning exploiters is not a problem, bull** reimbursement petitions are.
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2009.06.07 04:29:00 - [17] Originally by: Michael Corinthos Edited by: Michael Corinthos on 06/06/2009 20:36:54 Whether what the OP says about logging in a same account alt is true or not, what happened here is the battleship jumped through and immediately logged off. BEFORE aggression. Then, he was pointed, which stopped his emergency warp... for 30 seconds. At which point, instead of emergency warping (which it couldn't do, because it was pointed), his pointed ship simply disappeared. Nothing special or post-worthy about this, just the average, common, every-day, run-o'-the-mill logoffski. Nothing to see here.
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2009.06.07 04:41:00 - [18] Edited by: Misanth on 07/06/2009 04:43:12 Originally by: Jimer Lins It's not useless. Logoff exploits are a cancer of this game, contributing to the idea that you can play EVE on easy mode. GMs need to step the ** up and ban people who pull logoff crap. Logoffski is only one of the many issues that are ignored by CCP because there's no easy way to address it with their current tools. The only way to fix that situation is to make enough noise about it that they fix. the. god. damn. problem. Ignoring it on the grounds that it makes their job harder? Don't even bother telling me that it's plugging up the queue. Petitioning exploiters is not a problem, bull** reimbursement petitions are. That's a very harsh generalisation imho. Logoffski is imho, a perfectly valid tactic in some cases. Like when you want to catch a macro NPCer in a system, logs off one/more characters in belts and logs in, etc. Or, sitting at a SS, with no aggression and a hostile fleet comes in. You either try to warp around and set up new SS non-stop, or you'll be probed out. Especially if this is combined with RL. You have dinner and/or another reason to log off soon, and can't spend the time jumping between SS for potential hours back/forth? Log off and come back later. Then there's two other situations, where I do agree that logging off is something that could use a fix. 1) what OP experienced, when people log off while going through a gate, stays on grid for 30sec and then disappear, with no real possibility to catch him without a quick-aggro system where you insta-probe/insta-aggress him on the login/logoffs. Not viable if it's a fast/agile ship. 2) ratters insta-logging off when people come into system In both above cases I think there's simple solution(s) to fix this, that won't mess up with the other situations (where it might be perfectly valid to log off as a tactic). One of them is to increase the time your ship is visible in space after you logged off. The other would be to simply add aggression timers to those that get aggressed - after logging off. That would work great both against the ratters, as well as the gate-ctrlQ'rs. I.e. if you tackle them when they just have logged off, they'll be aggressed and you got your 15mins to kill them. I see no real setback with this system, it wouldn't destroy the game for those who disconnect or logs off in a safespot, for example. A third possibly solution would be to give a longer timer for NPC aggro, say, 1-2mins aggression from fighting NPC's. That wouldn't solve the ctrl-q on gates and safety you get there, so it's not ideal imho. It would help alot vs ratters tho. Anyway, TL;DR.. saying it's good/valid, or bad/whatever to log off.. that's quite a huge generalisation. Things differ from case to case. And players should be "allowed" to "legally" disconnect/log off for whatever reason they have, without getting punished.
Suitonia Gallente Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.06.07 04:54:00 - [19] Edited by: Suitonia on 07/06/2009 04:54:10 Originally by: Misanth The other would be to simply add aggression timers to those that get aggressed - after logging off. That would work great both against the ratters, as well as the gate-ctrlQ'rs. I.e. if you tackle them when they just have logged off, they'll be aggressed and you got your 15mins to kill them. I see no real setback with this system, it wouldn't destroy the game for those who disconnect or logs off in a safespot, for example ... oh god this, wish CCP would do this.
Jimer Lins Gallente Noir.	Posted - 2009.06.07 04:56:00 - [20] Hey Misanth. :) To clarify, for me the term "logoffski" implies logging off or disconnecting to avoid imminent combat. Logging off when there's no one on grid with you? Go ahead. I've logged out at safespots with no aggro so I could go get a beer and eat something. It is a game and I wouldn't encourage any mechanics that force people to treat it otherwise. I just don't like the fact that people can exploit the interaction of aggression timers and logoff mechanics to avoid an imminent demise (as in, logging off under gatecloak while a group is trying to nail you, or similar). tl;dr: I don't have a problem with logging off the game, even if you have hostiles in local. Just make it impossible/impractical to do it to avoid a fight that already started. Corp killboard-How to Kill Logoffskis
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2009.06.07 05:01:00 - [21] Originally by: Suitonia Edited by: Suitonia on 07/06/2009 04:54:10 Originally by: Misanth The other would be to simply add aggression timers to those that get aggressed - after logging off. That would work great both against the ratters, as well as the gate-ctrlQ'rs. I.e. if you tackle them when they just have logged off, they'll be aggressed and you got your 15mins to kill them. I see no real setback with this system, it wouldn't destroy the game for those who disconnect or logs off in a safespot, for example ... oh god this, wish CCP would do this. Been thinking the same many many times. I'm probably very blind and stupid, because I can't find a setback with it. And it solves so much crap that goes on. Lost count on how many ratting Ravens I probed down after e-warp, got them to armor and then they disappear. My quick probing should be rewarded. Their logoff shouldn't. I'd say the gatething is pretty gamebreaking tho, that's quite a major issue. Originally by: Jimer Lins To clarify, for me the term "logoffski" implies logging off or disconnecting to avoid imminent combat. Logging off when there's no one on grid with you? Yah, that makes perfect sense. The term itself implies it's an 'active' action (heh), but you never know, typing/communication = certain failure. Better cover your bases. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen.
Major Stallion Balls Deep Inc.	Posted - 2009.06.07 05:12:00 - [22] Originally by: Jimer Lins No, it's cowardly ****s who can't accept the consequences of their actions in the game that create petitionable situations. Always petition logoffskis. Eventually, CCP will realize that something must be done. They may not respond to individual petitions but they can see trends. you seem quite bitter....take a breath, if youre gunna cry about logoffskis, can i please hear you pipe up about WCS, Cloaks, and MWDing to get back to the gate? While we're at it, how about a rant about deagression.
Lana Torrin Minmatar Republic Military Skool	Posted - 2009.06.07 05:14:00 - [23] Logoffskis are still cool right?
EnslaverOfMinmatar Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.06.07 05:19:00 - [24] What if he disconnected due to jump bug?
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2009.06.07 05:24:00 - [25] Originally by: EnslaverOfMinmatar What if he disconnected due to jump bug? [ ] Welcome to weeks ago [ ] Assuming he lost his ship, he could've petitioned for a reimburse [ ] We all know that didn't happen [ ] Misanth is gay.. but I like that Pick one. Or several.
EnslaverOfMinmatar Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.06.07 07:13:00 - [26] Originally by: Misanth [ ] Welcome to weeks ago [ ] Assuming he lost his ship, he could've petitioned for a reimburse [ ] We all know that didn't happen [ ] Misanth is gay.. but I like that [x] Misanth is gay.. but Backdoor Bandit likes that Pick one. Or several.
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2009.06.07 07:14:00 - [27] Awwww.. I like Backdoor Bandit too! <3 <3 <3 <3
Lexa Hellfury Incura	Posted - 2009.06.07 08:17:00 - [28] Originally by: Michael Corinthos Originally by: Garmon and yea, Tri has no HONOUR, the other day I was in mostly harmless space camped in, a tri vaga convo'd me and asked me if he can help me kill them, I invited him to gang and he warped to me and shot me then died That's hilarious. And Lexa joined FW. People actually have an interest in following my movements? Get a life ppl. But yes, I'm in FW for the time being, though these assholes keep getting me killed with their inability to give proper intel or really do anything right. It's kinda embarrassing Originally by: RedSplat The Forum moderation Software known as Mitnal became self aware. CCP had no choice but to shut it down.
Dibsi Dei Salamyhkaisten kilta	Posted - 2009.06.07 08:46:00 - [29] The only way to get CCP fix logoffski* is to get everyone to logoff like crazy to induce a massive threadnaught. * That logging in another character thingie and imo logoffing while jumping into another system. Also capital logoffs are pretty lols since you only have 15 minutes to kill multiple dreadnaughts in different safespots or something.
Nerogk Shorn Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy SCUM.	Posted - 2009.06.07 10:33:00 - [30] Okay, the people yelling at me about the logoffski tactics were right, i believe. The reason i mistook it was I had thought that he was engaged on the other side of the gate to force a jump through. He sat there for a good 20 seconds and had his armor hardeners on when he jumped. Not to mention that when he got pointed he didn't have any shield. I had also thought you disappeared after 60 seconds and not 30. Lastly I thought that you still could get aggro timers while logged off, but apparently they can only be rebooted to 15 minutes. Originally by: Lady Karma Edited by: Lady Karma on 07/06/2009 01:53:44 I not sure what is funnier, the ops misunderstanding of logging off without aggression, or his attempt to call another player a coward for not engaging a gank squad. Loggoffski is lame, but he lived, you got annoyed enough to write a thread. I think he probably happy now. Originally by: Nerogk Shorn It's been petitioned, but i don't really think much can be done. It's idiots like you cluttering up the petition queue that screws it up for everyone else. Okay, i'm not sure if you are purposely acting stupid or not in order to troll, but either way you called me names so i'll argue with you. I'm not calling the player a coward because he didn't engage a gank squad. This is wrong on so many levels. First of all we were in a Ferox Ferox Cyclone and Moa, if played EVE before and pvp'ed you would certainly know that this isn't exactly a gank squad. Not to mention it was a Dominix, which is a Battleship fyi which is a bigger class of ships than any of our ships, with a better reputation. (sorry i'm not really sure how much you know and don't about EVE and pvp) Secondly "not engaging" would generally mean avoiding a fight "in game." If he burned back towards the gate, ran from us, or fit warp core stabilizers then it would be a different matter. He logged off because he was afraid of losing his ship to a bunch of failboats. Hence he was a coward. Here i'll look up the exact definition of coward, in case you don't know what it is. Coward: a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things. Now assuming that it was a person and not a dog or bear playing that seems to be pretty accurate. If it was a random carebear or some unknown alliance pilot that did this then there would be no thread. The fact it was a Triumvirate pilot causes surprise and the loss of respect.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.