EVE Search - [Proposal] Disable ship swaps at hangar while under aggro

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] Disable ship swaps at hangar while under aggro

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 07:26:00 - [1] Recently I found myself with a ninja looter, and frankly I could care less about that, keeps boring missions interesting and half the time I let them have the loot, there's always more loot to be had. In this case the guy nabbed from a can and went red blinky. Ok fun time. So I run off and get a crow to come back to play. So I locked up his vigil and before ya know it, in warps an orca and the guy switches ships to a loki. Long story short, one dead crow, big whoop, I can make back 12 mil ISK in my sleep. What irks me is that the guy is able to escape the consequences of actions with an alt in an orca. Suppose he was getting his ship beat up. Looking at the guy's profile, chances are he'd have swapped out to his pod and been free of consequences. (this was high sec btw). Needing an alt to cheat the challenges of single account play is cheap as it is, but the advantage of being able to escape consequences and play this sort of bait and switch game should be examined. I propose that one can not swap ships at a ship hangar while under aggro. P.S. Don't give me your "cry moar" crap, this is not a complaint, I enjoyed the fight, so to those sorts, have a sincere preemptive "psis off"
Naomi Knight	Posted - 2011.07.09 07:35:00 - [2] yep nerf lokis
wiersma Caldari Dark Matter Systems	Posted - 2011.07.09 07:38:00 - [3] while i do like your idea its has some problems. like playing in WH or 0.0 space where people are dependant of such tactics. so if you could find a way (discribe) how this would be inplemented without screwing over other players i would love to read it.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 08:02:00 - [4] Edited by: Adunh Slavy on 09/07/2011 08:03:22 Originally by: wiersma while i do like your idea its has some problems. like playing in WH or 0.0 space where people are dependant of such tactics. so if you could find a way (discribe) how this would be inplemented without screwing over other players i would love to read it. Where do we define getting "screwed over" stops or starts? If you could be more explicit that would be helpful. What I propose is if you're getting red boxed, you should not be able to swap ships. Maybe make it dependent on a warp scram being part of the deal or not. Under POS shields it should not apply, that's like docking in a station. Besides no one is going to chase someone to a gun covered POS. Edit: Sure you can eject and swap ships, but at least the price is paid for the swap.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.09 11:00:00 - [5] Not being able to swap ships -- wherever it occurs -- just goes totally against the spirit of EVE. Besides, soon as you saw the Orca warp in, you could have warped out. Your e-peen prevented that, and you wound up dead. No need to change the game for that, though. NOT supported; 'working as intended.'
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 11:04:00 - [6] Originally by: Ranka Mei NOT supported; 'working as intended.' Feel free to refer to the P.S. in the first post
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.09 11:08:00 - [7] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Ranka Mei NOT supported; 'working as intended.' Feel free to refer to the P.S. in the first post Read it, ignored it: saying you're not complaining, whilst complaining, is just a childish, manipulative trick. HTFU.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 11:14:00 - [8] Originally by: Ranka Mei HTFU. Refer to P.S.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 13:59:00 - [9] Adapt or die You have chosen death Congrats Now while he was switching to that loki you had ample time to gtfo and save yourself but you decide to stay and quench your carebear blood-lust and you where stupid enough to shoot a ninja in the first place so whos fault is it that you died. As i said adapt or die (please choose die some more these tears are funny)
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:02:00 - [10] Oh look, some one trying to be original. **** off loser.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:09:00 - [11] You sound mad Are you mad Or do you know everything i said is the truth and you have come unstuck you could of gtfo but you decided to fight die and then cry. Now you have proven to be so much fun im not going anywhere <3
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:12:00 - [12] Originally by: Now you have proven to be so much fun im not going anywhere <3 Be my guest, we can get down into it. Oh BTW, post with yuor main, or are you chicken ****?
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:15:00 - [13] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Now you have proven to be so much fun im not going anywhere <3 Be my guest, we can get down into it. Oh BTW, post with yuor main, or are you chicken ****? Arr yes your mad and i guess this is your main then well i goto say dear chap Who ever posts with there mains these days That would be stupid on my part letting you know whos coming Thats like giving you the cake and letting you eat it too oh nono that wont do at all. ps. <3
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:16:00 - [14] So chicken ****, thanks for proving who's the carebear ya big baby.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:18:00 - [15] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN You sound mad Are you mad Or do you know everything i said is the truth and you have come unstuck you could of gtfo but you decided to fight die and then cry. Yup, that's pretty much what happened. He had ample time to make himself scarce. Other guy warped in with his Orca, had to board his Loki, turn on his mods, target... in other words, OP had plenty of time to GTFO. He didn't, because he thought he could take him -- the epeen thingy. And then he starts a rather transparent post, saying he doesn't want to complain, only to complain after all. OP should just make a note to himself: "Next time bigger fish comes in, just leave." You know, I usually defend the carebear side, being one myself; but this was just player stupidity, plain and simple.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:21:00 - [16] Originally by: Ranka Mei You know, I usually defend the carebear side, being one myself; but this was just player stupidity, plain and simple. Were you there? Nope. Just being a troll attempting to derail. CCP likes people to commit to fights, this is just a cheap way out. So go whine and bleat your cry more bull ** to someone who gives a **
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:21:00 - [17] Originally by: Adunh Slavy So chicken ****, thanks for proving who's the carebear ya big baby. That "carebear" would be you You dont seem to understand the true nature of eve while it even blessed you with a small window to gtfo You also dont seem to understand that im not going to make your life easy and give you free intel that wouldn't be in the spirit of eve would it. And you now insult me and call me a coward i do say old bean for a 05 char i expected a little better ohh yes Now please cry more a representative will be with you shortly As ever <3
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:24:00 - [18] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN bull ** post with yuor main ***
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:24:00 - [19] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Ranka Mei You know, I usually defend the carebear side, being one myself; but this was just player stupidity, plain and simple. Were you there? Nope. Just being a troll attempting to derail. CCP likes people to commit to fights, this is just a cheap way out. So go whine and bleat your cry more bull ** to someone who gives a ** You sir seem to give a lot more than a (such foul language you should be ashamed of yourself) otherwise why are you still here crying hopeing for a reassuring shoulder to come along and comfort you. But it will never come dear chap for this is eve not wow you had your chance and you blew it.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:27:00 - [20] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN bull ** post with yuor main *** As i said easy intel easy intel is this going through or would you be in need of visual aids. Also i believe you where trying to call me a homosexual so i must kindly inform you that there are two Gs in that word All my love my dearest.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:28:00 - [21] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN But it will never come dear chap for this is eve not wow you had your chance and you blew it. ROFL, I don't feel the need to treat a wimp with much respect, if you don't like it, too ****ing bad. And if you think I am actually upset, you're not very bright. But thanks for helping me keep the thread up top.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:36:00 - [22] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN But it will never come dear chap for this is eve not wow you had your chance and you blew it. ROFL, I don't feel the need to treat a wimp with much respect, if you don't like it, too ****ing bad. And if you think I am actually upset, you're not very bright. But thanks for helping me keep the thread up top. Arr calling me a wimp i believe this is called projecting you are taking your own inadequateness and "projecting" them upon me It seems to me old chap you are the one who dosnt like it as your behaviour and language seem to reinforce this as i see no other reason to "cry" like this. I do not think your upset as you have demonstrated through your foul tongue and sobbing i know your upset and i seem to be a lot brighter than you if i must say so myself but dont worry i want this thread to be at the top so hopefully someone will help you in a very "evely" way. As ever my love
Alec Freeman Minmatar Deadspace Knights Matari Visionary Coalition	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:37:00 - [23] Nothing more amusing... Get can flipped well in 4x hulk 2x retriever 1x orca fleet, Orca ejects a ceptor and a huggin which the 2 retriever pilots jump into, thats one dead canflipper Quote: null
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:40:00 - [24] Originally by: Alec Freeman Nothing more amusing... Get can flipped well in 4x hulk 2x retriever 1x orca fleet, Orca ejects a ceptor and a huggin which the 2 retriever pilots jump into, thats one dead canflipper Quote: null That's quite different from being red boxed and swapping ships. What you describe is very legitimate IMO. Getting a "get out of fight free" card is the issue.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:42:00 - [25] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Alec Freeman Nothing more amusing... Get can flipped well in 4x hulk 2x retriever 1x orca fleet, Orca ejects a ceptor and a huggin which the 2 retriever pilots jump into, thats one dead canflipper Quote: null That's quite different from being red boxed and swapping ships. What you describe is very legitimate IMO. Getting a "get out of fight free" card is the issue. But my dear these are one in the same you cannot allow one but scorn the other.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:42:00 - [26] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN stuff Whatever troll boy
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:46:00 - [27] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN But my dear these are one in the same you cannot allow one but scorn the other. They are not the same troll boy. If you weren't trying so hard to defend the tactic you'd know better. It's plain that you've a lot invested in this cheap little trick.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:48:00 - [28] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN But my dear these are one in the same you cannot allow one but scorn the other. They are not the same troll boy. If you weren't trying so hard to defend the tactic you'd know better. It's plain that you've a lot invested in this cheap little trick. Im afraid my dear this "cheap little trick" as you put it is nothing compared to the grandeur of eve but none of less it is in keeping with the spirit of eve and im all for keeping eve in spirit. And troll boy what a lovely little nickname my love i will love you forever too.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 14:52:00 - [29] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN ...keeping with the spirit of eve ... Yeah, the spirit of committing to fights and not having an easy way out.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 15:00:00 - [30] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN ...keeping with the spirit of eve ... Yeah, the spirit of committing to fights and not having an easy way out. My darling ill ask you have you ever been in a large fight in nullsec or even a small fight in highsec finding the easy path is what eve is all about everyone wants to get on that road Take this scinario for you aye theres a solo ratting carrier how would you kill it would you A Tank the hard approach that shows off your e-peen/e-honour and use sub caps but make life much harder for yourself Or B Drop several dozen moms on it and rip it to sunder Do choose A or B and im afraid choosing neither is invalid
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 15:08:00 - [31] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN stuff Not going to play the hypothetical dilemma game. Find someone who cares about protecting the get out of fight free card orca trick, you'll get more sympathy.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 15:16:00 - [32] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN stuff Not going to play the hypothetical dilemma game. Find someone who cares about protecting the get out of fight free card orca trick, you'll get more sympathy. Arr you choose not to answer how sweet You seem to care quite a lot otherwise why els would you still be here As ive said eve isnt a nice place and the evey thing to do is use that gtfo free card but due to your own bloodlust you chose not to and you died to a better eve player but you come here and cry then you insult and use foul language because your warped e-honour makes you think that a "get out of jail free card" goes against the spirit of eve. I hope one day you will learn the true spirit of eve and start using your own "dirty tricks" instead of crying about loosing
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 15:23:00 - [33] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN yawn Awww, poor baby, I didn't go for your hypothetical crap. You keep on defending the cheap trick though with the "cry more" business, do that gankbear stereotype proud. You want to maintain a tactic that allows you to wimp out, like not posting with your main. I'll let that speak for it self.
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.09 15:36:00 - [34] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN yawn Awww, poor baby, I didn't go for your hypothetical crap. You keep on defending the cheap trick though with the "cry more" business, do that gankbear stereotype proud. You want to maintain a tactic that allows you to wimp out, like not posting with your main. I'll let that speak for it self. You still dont understand even though its been explained to you a dozen times my dear im afraid you are beyond hope
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.09 15:38:00 - [35] Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN lame attempt Going to need to do better than that, try again.
Nariya Kentaya Global Mining Operation OmniTech Initiative	Posted - 2011.07.10 03:04:00 - [36] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN stuff Not going to play the hypothetical dilemma game. Find someone who cares about protecting the get out of fight free card orca trick, you'll get more sympathy. alright, by your own logic, we should remove fleets aswell, because as any whiner knows, fleets are unfair because it makes it more then 1v1, and bringing in an orca to swap ships is the same as if he just swapped out with a buddy in a fleet by moving out of combat range. you really need to learn better, you had a window, and should have known your ship couldnt take it, its a legitamate tactic, shoulda either A) warped out, or B) called in a buddy to either rep or help you out with DPS (though with your attitude, i doubt anyone would come). fact is, you did neither, you chose to die.
DeMichael Crimson Republic University	Posted - 2011.07.10 03:23:00 - [37] Edited by: DeMichael Crimson on 10/07/2011 03:45:27 Actually, I like the idea. Just make it apply to high security only. It's like the 'Old West' when two persons agreed to a personal duel know as a 'Showdown' which the Sheriff would let happen. Global Criminal Countdowns such as shooting a neutral are handled by Concord (Sheriff) which is done very quickly. Getting a personal Criminal Countdown (Stealing) towards another player is asking for combat (Showdown). If someone in high security transgresses a neutral player and get's criminally flagged for stealing, they should not be allowed to switch ships during the 15 minute timer. If the neutral player responds and initiates combat, they can not switch ships during that 15 minute timer. The reason is because the player made the decision to transgress a neutral while in that specific ship and was caught 'Red' handed (so to speak) and is looking for a 'Showdown'. If the neutral player shoots the transgressor, he too becomes locked out of switching ships in that 15 minute timer since he decided to participate in the 'Showdown'. However, if the neutral player doesn't shoot or agress the transgressor, that neutral player can switch ships and then enter into the 'Showdown'. Both players can also run and hide (Dock in Station) after starting the 'Showdown' if they desire. Of course both players can also have their Corp (Gang) members jump in and do Remote Repair but they can't shoot unless shot at first. This could lead to some very interesting 'Showdowns' happening. Sorta like 'Showdown at the OK Corral'. It wouldn't take much to program this into the code mechanics and it wouldn't break the game. Actually, I think it would make the game more balanced and also level the playing field. That's my 2 ISK worth. DMC EDIT: Adunh Slavy, you can edit your original post and add this idea if you like it. Also you can post support to this proposal when you post a reply. Those that say - You made a choice, bla bla bla, this will break the game mechanics, bla bla bla, etc, are just trolling which I see happening a lot in this thread. Just ignore them.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 06:42:00 - [38] Originally by: Nariya Kentaya alright, by your own logic, we should remove fleets aswell, because as any whiner knows, fleets are unfair because it makes it more then 1v1, and bringing in an orca to swap ships is the same as if he just swapped out with a buddy in a fleet by moving out of combat range. It is against the design philosophy of committing to a fight. If you can't tell the difference, then you're not as insightful as you pretend to be.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.10 06:48:00 - [39] Not being able to swap is a bad idea. You just need to be faster to catch him in his original non-threatening ship, and not stick around when another ship warps in.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 06:53:00 - [40] Originally by: DeMichael Crimson Those that say - You made a choice, bla bla bla, this will break the game mechanics, bla bla bla, etc, are just trolling which I see happening a lot in this thread. Just ignore them. They are attempting to defend the tactic because they use it. The "cry more" stuff, the "carebear" crap is one of the oldest games on Eve forums. Just the typical gankbear whine and attempt at intimidation. As for your idea, that sounds as though it may be more complicated that the current flagging system can handle. What I am proposing is quite simple. A player can not switch ships at a ship hangar while they are being red boxed. They can eject, deal with the session timer and then switch ships. but not a direct swap while being red boxed.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 06:58:00 - [41] Originally by: Toovhon Not being able to swap is a bad idea. You just need to be faster to catch him in his original non-threatening ship, and not stick around when another ship warps in. It's not about me being faster or slower. It's about someone getting a cheap way out of a fight, a way out that goes against a design philosophy that CCP has been promoting for years - having players commit to fights.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.10 07:12:00 - [42] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon Not being able to swap is a bad idea. You just need to be faster to catch him in his original non-threatening ship, and not stick around when another ship warps in. It's not about me being faster or slower. It's about someone getting a cheap way out of a fight, a way out that goes against a design philosophy that CCP has been promoting for years - having players commit to fights. So that excuses you not being smart enough to run away when the odds turn in the other player's favour? As if most can theft isn't a setup anyway :-D
Kaelie Onren	Posted - 2011.07.10 07:46:00 - [43] I'm going to bookmark this thread on how a OP can quickly lose all credibility with the public audience once he gets all riled up and caught up in personal attacks and irrelevant arguments. As for the actual proposal, I don't think this is a good idea. So somebody is aggro'ing me, that means I cannot jump out of my ship to change ships to come back to kill him? Sounds like a birthday present for gankers and pirates to me.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 08:42:00 - [44] Originally by: Kaelie Onren I'm going to bookmark this thread on how a OP can quickly lose all credibility with the public audience once he gets all riled up and caught up in personal attacks and irrelevant arguments. Good for you, just add another personal attack in there while you're at it. Originally by: Kaelie Onren As for the actual proposal, I don't think this is a good idea. So somebody is aggro'ing me, that means I cannot jump out of my ship to change ships to come back to kill him? Sounds like a birthday present for gankers and pirates to me. The proposal is that you can't swap ships into and out of the hangar array. you can eject, warp off and come back and get another ship once the session timer is up.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 08:44:00 - [45] Originally by: Toovhon So that excuses you not being smart enough to run away when the odds turn in the other player's favour? As if most can theft isn't a setup anyway :-D Has nothing to do with me, it has to do with the commit to a fight design philosophy. Sorry, but fail, try again.
Vice Admiral Spreadsheet	Posted - 2011.07.10 11:56:00 - [46] It certainly sounds like and behaves like an exploit. CCP just need to identify it as one.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.07.10 14:06:00 - [47] So you failed to see the situation change and get out? Now you come on here complaining and then cry when others point out your failure? I like this thread already. Carry on.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.07.10 14:57:00 - [48] So not actually denying hangar swaps but rather maintenance array swaps? As long as it applies to high-sec only, I see no problem with it. Clean up your post (lifestory is really unnecessary ) and remove the mention of hangar for support.
Kaelie Onren	Posted - 2011.07.10 15:09:00 - [49] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Kaelie Onren I'm going to bookmark this thread on how a OP can quickly lose all credibility with the public audience once he gets all riled up and caught up in personal attacks and irrelevant arguments. Good for you, just add another personal attack in there while you're at it. No referral to your background, no referral to your name, race, upbringing or social class or experience, no unfounded assumptions about you, only the evidence of the past posts on this thread. Actually sounds to me like I was just stating facts. It seems that the problem may be that you take many statements as personal, thus setting off a derailed argument which is a digression from the actual thread. Which, this branch is soon in danger of being, if we were to continue this meta-discussion about how you take things personally.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 15:33:00 - [50] Originally by: Kaelie Onren <The "I am not doing what I am doing." essay> LOL. You can play the innocent little lamb game someplace else. If it bugs you that I don't take crap on forums and throw it right back, then feel free to ignore me. Other wise deal with it. Since you've nothing to add to the topic, you can now be cited as a hypocrite. Thanks for playing.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 15:47:00 - [51] Originally by: Mag's So you failed to see the situation change and get out? Now you come on here complaining and then cry when others point out your failure? I like this thread already. Carry on. Has nothing to do with me. It has to do with the cheap little tactic to avoid committing to a fight. Thanks for trying the "cry more" tactic. Refer to the P.S.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.07.10 16:51:00 - [52] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Mag's So you failed to see the situation change and get out? Now you come on here complaining and then cry when others point out your failure? I like this thread already. Carry on. Has nothing to do with me. It has to do with the cheap little tactic to avoid committing to a fight. Thanks for trying the "cry more" tactic. Refer to the P.S. [x] Adunh Slavy made the OP. [x] Adunh Slavy talked about himself and his fail. [ ] I said "cry more". [x] Adunh Slavy cries a lot anyway. [ ] Cloaks were mentioned. [x] Adunh Slavy seems to be upset. [ ] Profit was had. Great thread, will read again.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.10 17:05:00 - [53] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Mag's So you failed to see the situation change and get out? Now you come on here complaining and then cry when others point out your failure? I like this thread already. Carry on. Has nothing to do with me. It has to do with the cheap little tactic to avoid committing to a fight. Thanks for trying the "cry more" tactic. Refer to the P.S. Yeah, except he didn't avoid the fight, did he? He switched ships, and you got PWNED, b*tch. You moron. You fell for the oldest trick in the book. Even 3-weeks old noobs know better than to blindly jump on a can-flipper. And yet you went for it. Your choice, your consequences. He could also have called in his corp buddies to warp to 0 on your ass. That is just one of the risks you run for taking the bait. You are pretty shameless, really. Most players, when they make a booboo like this, just shake their heads, smile at their own stupidity, and then move on. Not you, apparently.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.07.10 17:42:00 - [54] Originally by: Ranka Mei ..Not you, apparently. Not CCP either actually, the idea of unscoutable forces is something they want to get rid off and is one of the main reasons for cyno's probably being changed SoonÖ. Last I checked/heard the maintenance array trick is complete consequence avoidance, as even if a victim is prepared and beats the crap out of the griefer, he can just store ship leaving an unaggressed pod which brings concord if attacked. It is like playing kick-can and then carrying the can around
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.10 17:51:00 - [55] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Originally by: Ranka Mei ..Not you, apparently. Not CCP either actually, the idea of unscoutable forces is something they want to get rid off and is one of the main reasons for cyno's probably being changed SoonÖ. [Citation needed] Quote: Last I checked/heard the maintenance array trick is complete consequence avoidance, as even if a victim is prepared and beats the crap out of the griefer, he can just store ship leaving an unaggressed pod which brings concord if attacked. Then he just shouldn't fire at the pod. Doh. :) But that's problem here, isn't it? The OP apparently can't control himself very well. And I bet he would petition it too, if he shot the pod. Ugh!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.10 18:54:00 - [56] This thread is hilarious :-D The OP is dumb enough to attack a bait can thief. The OP sees an Orca warp in. He keeps trying to kill the no doubt well tanked bait. The bait ship enters the Orca. The OP does nothing. A T3 pops out of the Orca. The OP probably tried to attack it :-D Certainly the OP still didn't run. cue locking sounds POP The OP's sad little ship vanishes in a cloud of plasma. In summary the OP had every chance to prevent or later disengage from the agression he was clearly beyond being able to cope with. But instead of learning an important lesson in Eve, the OP decides to get on the forums and start wailing that those nasty wasty pirates won't follow Marquess of Queensberry Rules :-D When the OP's noob-level mistakes and stupidity are then promptly pointed out to him, he starts pummeling his little fists ineffectively on the ground, cries more, and continues on his epic fail to get that Eve is street fighting, not boxing in a ring with rules. My question is: how is someone suffering from near total braindeath able to turn his PC on, much less play Eve? -- Frog blast the vent core!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 19:14:00 - [57] Such typical Eve tough guy bravodo. This is why I put the P.S. in the first post, because all the internet tough guys come up with the cry more crap. They, some of you, don't care about the issue and that it is against design philosophy. Thanks for helping me prove the point of the sorts that defend these lame tactics. Of course no matter what I say, the mentality will always retort with "cry more" or "u mad". It's too difficult to discuss the actual issue. It's too dangerous discuss it for some of you, who wish to divert attention from such a cheap little trick and attempt to place all the blame on the messenger. None of you are objective enough to face up to the fact that this lame tactic goes against the commit to a fight design philosophy. You'd rather whine and waggle your fingers at me. Just another lame tactic. Keep making my point for me :) Sandbox Protection League
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.07.10 19:22:00 - [58] Was a flurry of Dev activity on null/cyno improvements back in February if I recall. Just regular posts in different threads so finding it with the broken search is not something I'll do without being drunk/drugged. (Cyno delay, cyno displacement, mobile jammer and so on were the thread topics I think). Originally by: Ranka Mei Then he just shouldn't fire at the pod. Doh. :) But that's problem here, isn't it? The OP apparently can't control himself very well. And I bet he would petition it too, if he shot the pod. Ugh! Don't think he shot the pod, but you are missing the point rather badly. The array trick allow us to completely circumvent aggression mechanics .. the very same mechanics that people want made harsher by extending dock aggression and making RR subject to it. There is no reason whatsoever for maintenance arrays to be excluded from the aggression mechanics, but CCP in their infinite ignorance probably don't know how to fix it so hopes it goes away on its own.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.10 19:35:00 - [59] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Such typical Eve tough guy bravodo. This is why I put the P.S. in the first post, because all the internet tough guys come up with the cry more crap. They, some of you, don't care about the issue and that it is against design philosophy. Thanks for helping me prove the point of the sorts that defend these lame tactics. Of course no matter what I say, the mentality will always retort with "cry more" or "u mad". It's too difficult to discuss the actual issue. It's too dangerous discuss it for some of you, who wish to divert attention from such a cheap little trick and attempt to place all the blame on the messenger. None of you are objective enough to face up to the fact that this lame tactic goes against the commit to a fight design philosophy. You'd rather whine and waggle your fingers at me. Just another lame tactic. Keep making my point for me :) Keep failing to admit you got yourself killed through your own stupidity. You had several chances to avoid your destruction, and then to avoid being mocked here. But you didn't take a single one of them. As I said - this thread is hilarious :-D -- Frog blast the vent core!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 19:37:00 - [60] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Originally by: Ranka Mei Then he just shouldn't fire at the pod. Doh. :) But that's problem here, isn't it? The OP apparently can't control himself very well. And I bet he would petition it too, if he shot the pod. Ugh! Don't think he shot the pod, but you are missing the point rather badly. The array trick allow us to completely circumvent aggression mechanics .. the very same mechanics that people want made harsher by extending dock aggression and making RR subject to it. There is no reason whatsoever for maintenance arrays to be excluded from the aggression mechanics, but CCP in their infinite ignorance probably don't know how to fix it so hopes it goes away on its own. There was no pod to shoot. The other player borded the new ship straight away, from vigil to loki with no intermediate pod session change involved. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.10 19:42:00 - [61] Originally by: Toovhon Keep failing to admit you got yourself killed through your own stupidity. You had several chances to avoid your destruction, and then to avoid being mocked here. But you didn't take a single one of them. As I said - this thread is hilarious :-D Awww look, another lame attempt at attacking the messenger and not the message. Thanks for the bump. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.10 20:30:00 - [62] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon Keep failing to admit you got yourself killed through your own stupidity. You had several chances to avoid your destruction, and then to avoid being mocked here. But you didn't take a single one of them. As I said - this thread is hilarious :-D Awww look, another lame attempt at attacking the messenger and not the message. Thanks for the bump. Your message is that you should be protected from being stupid. No thanks. Your stupidity is too funny :-) -- Frog blast the vent core!
Kaelie Onren	Posted - 2011.07.10 21:13:00 - [63] Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 10/07/2011 21:17:20 Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Kaelie Onren <The "I am not doing what I am doing." essay> LOL. You can play the innocent little lamb game someplace else. If it bugs you that I don't take crap on forums and throw it right back, then feel free to ignore me. Other wise deal with it. Since you've nothing to add to the topic, you can now be cited as a hypocrite. Thanks for playing. Actually, I'm quite satisfied at having you prove my point exactly! :) (which was, incidentally if you missed it, if you didn't come across so angry and looking to 'punch' back at any response you may have gotten more supports to this thread.)
j1tabug IWINIWINIWIN	Posted - 2011.07.11 12:42:00 - [64] My darling you still appear to be mad at your own inability's. Have you found the help i told you about yet or would you like us to come to you it would only cost us a few mill a week to teach your entire corp how to play eve.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.11 16:20:00 - [65] The issue is the break in the design philosophy of committing to a fight that a ship hangar on an orca provides. The proposal is that when a player is red boxed, they can not swap to another ship directly from the hangar. They could eject, and leave the ship in space and deal with the 30 second session timer. The detractors of the thread continue to wish to make the thread about me and not about the issue. When starting the thread, I knew what sort of crap would be headed my way, and that is exactly what has occurred. The detractors act as if this behavior of theirs is unexpected. It is a common pattern on these forums. Someone recognizes something in the game is a bit off, they give their feelings about it on the forums, and those that make use of the imbalance attack the messenger with noises like "carebear", "crymore" and various other sorts of insults. Their goal is to maintain the imbalance, to silence the messenger. Those who have been around for a while have seen this pattern repeated time and time again, from NOS ECM Domi, to pre nano-nerf right on up through the old doomsday device. An imbalance exists in the design, the detractors want to keep it - that is the meaning of their words, nothing more or less. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.11 16:56:00 - [66] Originally by: Kaelie Onren Actually, I'm quite satisfied at having you prove my point exactly! :) (which was, incidentally if you missed it, if you didn't come across so angry and looking to 'punch' back at any response you may have gotten more supports to this thread.) If you predict the sun will rise tomorrow, will you also expect to get paid? Often people don't outwardly support threads like these because they don't want to be called names by the self appointed pillars of what is and isn't "Eve". That is why those self appointed aholes behave as they do, to silence the message and scare off support. It wouldn't matter of I replied in kind or not. My initial post in this thread, the P.S. shows I was and remain quite aware of how this would go. I for one find it fun to cuss back at them and watch them get all worked up and make their empty threats, even got evemail of veiled threats from them. It's all rather amusing. Sandbox Protection League
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.11 16:59:00 - [67] ^^ And there's an equally predictable pattern of people getting blown up, thru their own gross stupidity, who then immediately post to have the other guy's tactic nerfed, instead of spending a few moments in self-reflection on what they did wrong. And you, manfriend, did plenty wrong: you blindly engaged a can-flipper, not using your brain, thinking it might have been a bait. You suddenly saw an Orca warp in -- you didn't warp out. You saw the guy change ships -- you didn't warp out. You died. Those are the facts. You had ample time to get to safety; yet, for some bizarre reason, you chose to hang around. And then you died (but we already covered that). And then you go post on the forum, saying you want the other guy nerfed. I don't think so. And no, for the umptiest time, he didn't evade any consequences. He enaged you in combat: remember the part where you died at his hands? Now, if you could actually dock up inside an Orca, you might have had a point; but you can't: he was still forced to face you in battle; and he did. And you died. Live with that. -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.11 17:46:00 - [68] Originally by: Ranka Mei <it's the messenger's fault essay> Oh so original, again attacking the messenger. Thanks for contributing to the typical fallacy. Again, read the first post, altering the subject doesn't not absolve you of your stupidity - the mechanic allows people to escape consequences regardless of this particular instance. Oh, and so you don't feel left out, "**** off". Have a nice day. Sandbox Protection League
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation RvB - RED Federation	Posted - 2011.07.11 18:13:00 - [69] Let me see if I get this right... You are mad that after you shipped up to kill his vigil he then shipped up to kill your crow? This is so typical. The ones who cry the most always seem to be the ones who are mad someone managed to turn the tables on them after they thought they were the ones who turned said table. This is not a gentlemen's dueling society here. This is simulated warfare including piracy and terrorism. Expecting others to follow your E-Bushido is going to send you down a path of misery and rage, You should go ahead and go back to WOW now and save yourself some grief. But you won't which is great because you'll provide the rest of us with more entertainment.
Rented	Posted - 2011.07.11 19:18:00 - [70] Edited by: Rented on 11/07/2011 19:21:56 Orcas used in this manner are no different from zero risk logistics, at least with logistics they get flagged to you. You can make all the 'EVE isn't fair, look at nullsec, wowz there are fleets in this game' comparisons you like, but in every other instance of direct combat assistance in this game, you atleast have the option of shooting the help. That and obviously this isn't a problem in nullsec so the abundance of nullsec comparisons don't particularly apply, hurr durr. I find people defending the use of orcas in this way under the guise of keeping EVE hardcore to be the height of irony. You would seriously propose that preserving what amounts to no-risk logistics available anywhere in highsec even remotely resembles anything but extreme risk-aversion, or to be even remotely similar to the hardcore nature of EVE? Pathetic. That granted, this OP seems kinda emo so I suppose I can't blame the trolling. YES- I've had this tactic used against me. NO- I didn't lose anything, I won the fight, they ran. YES- They should've lost their orca for losing the fight so badly, unfortunately due to a certain risk-averse mechanic I was unable to destroy their orca as I would've done if it were flagged just like every other combat assistance mechanic in the game.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.11 20:42:00 - [71] Originally by: Rented That granted, this OP seems kinda emo so I suppose I can't blame the trolling. LOL, it's not emo, it called drawing in the flies. Sandbox Protection League
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.11 20:52:00 - [72] Originally by: Rented I find people defending the use of orcas in this way under the guise of keeping EVE hardcore to be the height of irony. You would seriously propose that preserving what amounts to no-risk logistics available anywhere in highsec even remotely resembles anything but extreme risk-aversion, or to be even remotely similar to the hardcore nature of EVE? Pathetic. Everyone knows better than to blindly engage a can-flipper. And why? Because there is NO WAY of telling what is coming to you. You can have 10 of his corp buddies hotdrop on your arse to 0 in an instant. And that, indeed, is part of what EVE is. Your argument that you can at least shoot the help is moot: you think his Crow would have survived an onslaught like that? And my main point was not that EVE is hardcore, really; rather I pointed out the 'softcore' nature of his predicament to him: he had ample opportunities and time to warp out; he didn't. Soon thereafter he died. Quote: You're free to do whatever you want with an orca by your side, the only limit is the 30 second session change timer which is pretty trivial, unless you're a complete idiot but that applies literally everywhere. Immune to losing your ship? No problem, swap out of the fight at any time. You want instant full-hp-restore logistics? No problem, you can fit 4 Lokis in here easy. You want your logistics to be protected by concord? No problem, it is. Orca itself is not providing aggression-logistics (even though it feels like it) ; not directly, at least. Thus, Orca itself should never be flagged. I can see a certain logic in not being able to use Orca maintenance bay while under player aggro. But I'd like to stress that I am, at heart, against this risk-aversion proposal: calling in help troops, whether they be corp buddies, or forces being cyno-ed in (obviously not applicable to highsec), or alts coming to lend assistance in an Orca, these are all things that can happen to you when you engage someone you 'think' is alone. If you don't want to take the chance, then don't. -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises	Posted - 2011.07.11 21:04:00 - [73] Easy. Just like RR transfers aggro, using a ship fitting/hangar should also transfer aggro (to the orca in this case). I don't have a problem with people using alts. Alts shouldn't be able to participate in a conflict, consequence free though. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.11 21:14:00 - [74] Originally by: Bagehi Easy. Just like RR transfers aggro, using a ship fitting/hangar should also transfer aggro (to the orca in this case). I don't have a problem with people using alts. Alts shouldn't be able to participate in a conflict, consequence free though. Are you seriously suggesting to extend aggro to ships that not themselves take place in ANY aggressive action? Doesn't compute. And could be abused as well (to get someone's Orca blown up: either on purpose or by accident). -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises	Posted - 2011.07.11 21:24:00 - [75] Edited by: Bagehi on 11/07/2011 21:26:02 Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Bagehi Easy. Just like RR transfers aggro, using a ship fitting/hangar should also transfer aggro (to the orca in this case). I don't have a problem with people using alts. Alts shouldn't be able to participate in a conflict, consequence free though. Are you seriously suggesting to extend aggro to ships that not themselves take place in ANY aggressive action? Doesn't compute. And could be abused as well (to get someone's Orca blown up: either on purpose or by accident). Interfering in a fight by providing a different ship or fitting is most definitely an aggressive action. If someone handed a fighter a gun in a knife fight, I don't think anyone would have a problem accepting that as an aggressive action. You don't accidentally join a fleet, accidentally turn on "allow access" then accidentally situate your ship where a fight is going on. The "not aggression!" is the exact same argument that had been used against transferring aggro to an RR ship. Give me a situation where this could be abused where the ship hangar pilot isn't either complicit or completely stupid to the point of deserving to get blown up and I'll accept your point. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.11 21:40:00 - [76] Originally by: Bagehi Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Bagehi Easy. Just like RR transfers aggro, using a ship fitting/hangar should also transfer aggro (to the orca in this case). I don't have a problem with people using alts. Alts shouldn't be able to participate in a conflict, consequence free though. Are you seriously suggesting to extend aggro to ships that not themselves take place in ANY aggressive action? Doesn't compute. And could be abused as well (to get someone's Orca blown up: either on purpose or by accident). Interfering in a fight by providing a different ship or fitting is most definitely an aggressive action. If someone handed a fighter a gun in a knife fight, I don't think anyone would have a problem accepting that as an aggressive action. You don't accidentally join a fleet, accidentally turn on "allow access" then accidentally situate your ship where a fight is going on. The "not aggression!" is the exact same argument that had been used against transferring aggro to an RR ship. Give me a situation where this could be abused where the ship hangar pilot isn't either complicit or completely stupid to the point of deserving to get blown up and I'll accept your point. RR-ing a ship that's engaged in aggression obviously, and rightfully so, transfers aggro to the person's ship doing the RR. This, however, is a completely different sutuation: the Orca is not itself in any way, shape or form, lending support to a ship engaged in aggression. All it really does is make its ship maintenance bay available to fleet members: that's all. What that fleet members do with their ship is no longer the Orca pilot's concern. To debunk your gun/knife example, yes, what indeed if someone was in a knife-fight, ran into a nearby gun store and came out guns blazing, would you now transfer legal 'aggro' to the store owner? This thread is getting crazier by the minute. :) -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.11 22:08:00 - [77] Originally by: Ranka Mei RR-ing a ship that's engaged in aggression obviously, and rightfully so, transfers aggro to the person's ship doing the RR. This, however, is a completely different sutuation: the Orca is not itself in any way, shape or form, lending support to a ship engaged in aggression. All it really does is make its ship maintenance bay available to fleet members: that's all. What that fleet members do with their ship is no longer the Orca pilot's concern. But it is giving support, a safe hiding place for that ship. Docking and jumping gates also give that support, but at the cost of a session change and in some cases the 30 second aggression timer. No such costs are imposed upon the pilot doing the ship swap in this instance or in the hypothetical case of a pilot docking the ship and sitting there in a pod - ship now perfectly safe and protected by Concord while in the Orca's hangar. Originally by: Ranka Mei To debunk your gun/knife example, yes, what indeed if someone was in a knife-fight, ran into a nearby gun store and came out guns blazing, would you now transfer legal 'aggro' to the store owner? This thread is getting crazier by the minute. :) No analogy is perfect, to stretch one is fallacious. Of course in your stretch, you forget to mention if the gun store owner willing participated. How convenient. Sandbox Protection League
Ranka Mei	Posted - 2011.07.11 22:25:00 - [78] Originally by: Adunh Slavy But it is giving support, a safe hiding place for that ship. Docking and jumping gates also give that support, but at the cost of a session change and in some cases the 30 second aggression timer. No such costs are imposed upon the pilot doing the ship swap in this instance or in the hypothetical case of a pilot docking the ship and sitting there in a pod - ship now perfectly safe and protected by Concord while in the Orca's hangar. You know, crazy as it sounds, I think I'm going to support your proposal. :) LOL. No, seriously. Extending aggro to the Orca in the case where one of the ships it had in its maintenance bay commits an aggressive act, I think that's going too far. But I can see how it's reasonable one should not be allowed to dock up in one while under player aggro. -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Rented	Posted - 2011.07.11 22:45:00 - [79] Edited by: Rented on 11/07/2011 22:49:32 Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Adunh Slavy But it is giving support, a safe hiding place for that ship. Docking and jumping gates also give that support, but at the cost of a session change and in some cases the 30 second aggression timer. No such costs are imposed upon the pilot doing the ship swap in this instance or in the hypothetical case of a pilot docking the ship and sitting there in a pod - ship now perfectly safe and protected by Concord while in the Orca's hangar. You know, crazy as it sounds, I think I'm going to support your proposal. :) LOL. No, seriously. Extending aggro to the Orca in the case where one of the ships it had in its maintenance bay commits an aggressive act, I think that's going too far. But I can see how it's reasonable one should not be allowed to dock up in one while under player aggro. O_o that was a suprise turnaround. Personally I just find it rather ridiculous how orcas have become mobile personal stations that completely ignore aggression mechanics making them usable in-combat. PS- Adunh, The aggression timer is 60 seconds.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.11 22:49:00 - [80] Originally by: Ranka Mei You know, crazy as it sounds, I think I'm going to support your proposal. :) LOL. Thanks. Originally by: Ranka Mei No, seriously. Extending aggro to the Orca in the case where one of the ships it had in its maintenance bay commits an aggressive act, I think that's going too far. But I can see how it's reasonable one should not be allowed to dock up in one while under player aggro. The extension of aggro does sound a bit too far, and also could lead to some griefs and exploits that may not be desirable, I can imagine a few. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 01:16:00 - [81] Originally by: Adunh Slavy I dimiss every uncomfortable truth that I'm the one who **ed up. I refuse to deal with my situation. Instead I choose to whinge like a little ***. Yes, yes. You're right, everyone else is wrong. The other player should have stayed in his weaker ship and let you shoot him, instead of closing the astoundingly obvious trap on your stupid arse :-D -- The Door!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 01:21:00 - [82] Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Adunh Slavy But it is giving support, a safe hiding place for that ship. Docking and jumping gates also give that support, but at the cost of a session change and in some cases the 30 second aggression timer. No such costs are imposed upon the pilot doing the ship swap in this instance or in the hypothetical case of a pilot docking the ship and sitting there in a pod - ship now perfectly safe and protected by Concord while in the Orca's hangar. You know, crazy as it sounds, I think I'm going to support your proposal. :) LOL. No, seriously. Extending aggro to the Orca in the case where one of the ships it had in its maintenance bay commits an aggressive act, I think that's going too far. But I can see how it's reasonable one should not be allowed to dock up in one while under player aggro. I don't recall NPC stations gaining aggro when people dock there. You can SEE the Orca just as easily. You know what the possibilities are. If you don't like them, GTFO. -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 02:02:00 - [83] Originally by: Toovhon Yes, yes. You're right, everyone else is wrong. The other player should have stayed in his weaker ship and let you shoot him, instead of closing the astoundingly obvious trap on your stupid arse :-D yawn you need some new material. At least someone previous was willing to try the go back to wow line. You just keep repeating the same stupid crap. I suppose that's easier than facing up to the imbalance that exists. Sandbox Protection League
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.12 02:17:00 - [84] Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Adunh Slavy But it is giving support, a safe hiding place for that ship. Docking and jumping gates also give that support, but at the cost of a session change and in some cases the 30 second aggression timer. No such costs are imposed upon the pilot doing the ship swap in this instance or in the hypothetical case of a pilot docking the ship and sitting there in a pod - ship now perfectly safe and protected by Concord while in the Orca's hangar. You know, crazy as it sounds, I think I'm going to support your proposal. :) LOL. No, seriously. Extending aggro to the Orca in the case where one of the ships it had in its maintenance bay commits an aggressive act, I think that's going too far. But I can see how it's reasonable one should not be allowed to dock up in one while under player aggro. I don't recall NPC stations gaining aggro when people dock there. You can SEE the Orca just as easily. You know what the possibilities are. If you don't like them, GTFO. And that is why NPC stations don't draw aggro when people dock there. :) But you cannot escape therein to avoid the consequences of your aggression, either (at least not immediately). So, under aggro rule, one shouldn't be able to find refuge in an Orca for the duration, either. I agree the OP had plenty of time to get away. But, ultimately, I realized that his decision to stay had nothing to do with the issue he brought up. If you can't dock inside a station, you shouldn't be allowed to dock inside an Orca, either. That logic is hard to subvert. Besides, an Orca is like a locally spawn super-station, in that you you can just 'hug' it and play docking games with it, even when you're webbed and scrambled to death... or, not to death, is the point, rather. :) -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.12 02:24:00 - [85] Originally by: Adunh Slavy the design philosophy of committing to a fight Uhh, what philosophy again? Whoever told you that is an idiot, this game revolves around NOT committing to the fight while making your idiot victim commit to it.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 02:34:00 - [86] Originally by: Toovhon I don't recall NPC stations gaining aggro when people dock there. You can SEE the Orca just as easily. You know what the possibilities are. If you don't like them, GTFO. An NPC station or a gate is a passive entity, they are not player controlled, they make no choices. An orca pilot does make choices, as does the player who chooses to use this tactic. The tactic creates an imbalance that allows someone to escape the consequences of their actions. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 02:55:00 - [87] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Adunh Slavy the design philosophy of committing to a fight Uhh, what philosophy again? Whoever told you that is an idiot, this game revolves around NOT committing to the fight while making your idiot victim commit to it. Yeah, ya think so huh? Tell it to the devs then. http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=427 Here I'll help, "Another reason has to do with game mechanic and can be summed up to pretty much the same argument as when warp core stabilizers where balanced. When going into a fight we want people to commit to a fight. That means when you go into a fight you are risking your ship or ships, not just warping in on anything and if you can't handle it you just warp off." So so stabs should be changed back to the old way, nano-nerf should be undone too I take it? I'm sure CCP devs appreciate you calling them idiots. That thing in your mouth? It's called a foot. Sandbox Protection League
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.12 03:48:00 - [88] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 12/07/2011 03:49:38 Originally by: Adunh Slavy "Another reason has to do with game mechanic and can be summed up to pretty much the same argument as when warp core stabilizers where balanced. When going into a fight we want people to commit to a fight. That means when you go into a fight you are risking your ship or ships, not just warping in on anything and if you can't handle it you just warp off." Do you even understand what he is saying? Since you obviously dont, I'd like to encourage you to review what the nano-nerf was actually about. It would probably help to read all the assorted dev blogs on that topic too. Hint: It was not about removing kite tactics from the game. It was about removing the ability to deal damage while at the same time completely avoiding incoming damage. The ability to 'just warp off' if you cant take something did remain completely untouched FYI. Yes, thats a foot. Its so deep in your mouth its almost in your stomach. Edit: And no, as someone who uses mainly nanoships, I'd very much like to keep that buff, erm, I mean 'nerf'.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 04:57:00 - [89] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon I don't recall NPC stations gaining aggro when people dock there. You can SEE the Orca just as easily. You know what the possibilities are. If you don't like them, GTFO. An NPC station or a gate is a passive entity, they are not player controlled, they make no choices. An orca pilot does make choices, as does the player who chooses to use this tactic. The tactic creates an imbalance that allows someone to escape the consequences of their actions. Well I wouldn't want to be the Orca pilot who gets screwed over by his corpmate in that situation. -- The Door!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 04:59:00 - [90] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon Yes, yes. You're right, everyone else is wrong. The other player should have stayed in his weaker ship and let you shoot him, instead of closing the astoundingly obvious trap on your stupid arse :-D yawn you need some new material. At least someone previous was willing to try the go back to wow line. You just keep repeating the same stupid crap. I suppose that's easier than facing up to the imbalance that exists. Continue to gloss over that you screwed up and it's your fault you died. Whatever you do, never deal with reality. -- The Door!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 05:01:00 - [91] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Adunh Slavy the design philosophy of committing to a fight Uhh, what philosophy again? Whoever told you that is an idiot, this game revolves around NOT committing to the fight while making your idiot victim commit to it. Yeah, ya think so huh? Tell it to the devs then. http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=427 Here I'll help, "Another reason has to do with game mechanic and can be summed up to pretty much the same argument as when warp core stabilizers where balanced. When going into a fight we want people to commit to a fight. That means when you go into a fight you are risking your ship or ships, not just warping in on anything and if you can't handle it you just warp off." So so stabs should be changed back to the old way, nano-nerf should be undone too I take it? I'm sure CCP devs appreciate you calling them idiots. That thing in your mouth? It's called a foot. Way to ignore that he was pointing out Eve is about fighting as UNfairly as possible. You think anyone with a brain goes willingly into a 'fair' fight in Eve or RL? Of course not. You look for advantage, and take it. -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 08:45:00 - [92] Originally by: Toovhon Well I wouldn't want to be the Orca pilot who gets screwed over by his corpmate in that situation. See the bottom of post 80 dimwit. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 08:50:00 - [93] Originally by: Toovhon Continue to gloss over that you screwed up and it's your fault you died. Whatever you do, never deal with reality. yawn Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 08:57:00 - [94] Originally by: Omara Otawan Do you even understand what he is saying? Yep, apparently you don't. Nice attempt at trying to back off from calling devs idiots though. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 09:52:00 - [95] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon Continue to gloss over that you screwed up and it's your fault you died. Whatever you do, never deal with reality. yawn So your ignorance of your own failings is willful then. Ok. No one can help you here if you're not prepared to learn from your mistakes. -- The Door!
Ineka	Posted - 2011.07.12 10:28:00 - [96] Originally by: wiersma while i do like your idea its has some problems. like playing in WH or 0.0 space where people are dependant of such tactics. so if you could find a way (discribe) how this would be inplemented without screwing over other players i would love to read it. Just make it impossible in high sec like neutral rep should also be, either you're in the same fleet/corp and so get the aggression timer, or you're not and shouldn't be able to without concord response. Nasty abuses of game mechanics should get nasty consequences but they don't, it's Eve, so you better find some friends wardec his corp/alliance and spank them until they ask for mercy.
Just Another Toon	Posted - 2011.07.12 10:57:00 - [97] they should not be able to dock full stop! its feckng annoying. you go blinky you should have a docking timer - simple!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 14:55:00 - [98] Originally by: Toovhon So your ignorance of your own failings is willful then. Ok. No one can help you here if you're not prepared to learn from your mistakes. Are you always an idiot or do you just act like one for special occasions? Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 16:12:00 - [99] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon So your ignorance of your own failings is willful then. Ok. No one can help you here if you're not prepared to learn from your mistakes. Are you always an idiot or do you just act like one for special occasions? Do you always insult people who point out you're the one who screwed up, or do you still not understand you got yourself blown up? :-D Which is it? Stupidity or delusion? -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 16:22:00 - [100] Originally by: Toovhon Do you always insult people who point out you're the one who screwed up, or do you still not understand you got yourself blown up? :-D Which is it? Stupidity or delusion? Aww, did I hurt your feelings? You're the one that tossed the first insult and now you want to whine? boo hoo. Cry more ya hypocrite. Maybe you can dock your personality in your orca and get a new one, rather than being exposed as a simpleton. P.S. Thanks for the bump Sandbox Protection League
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises	Posted - 2011.07.12 16:37:00 - [101] Originally by: Just Another Toon they should not be able to dock full stop! its feckng annoying. you go blinky you should have a docking timer - simple! This, at the very least. I'm still a fan of transferring aggression though, as the orca pilot is clearly lending aid in a fight. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.12 16:43:00 - [102] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 12/07/2011 16:43:31 Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Omara Otawan Do you even understand what he is saying? Yep, apparently you don't. Nice attempt at trying to back off from calling devs idiots though. Care to point out where I said anything like that again? Oh wait, you cant. My exact wording was: "whoever told you that (there is a design philosophy of committing to a fight in EVE) is an idiot". Factual evidence that there isnt such a philosophy (non-exhaustive list): - non-uniform speed properties on ships - limited range warp disruption and speed control modules - long range weapon systems - anchorable warp disruption bubbles - wormhole jump/aggression mechanics - logoff after jump mechanics - logoff mechanics regarding supercapitals Now it was YOU who wrongly deduced that there must be such a philosophy from the dev blog you quoted, which contained exactly zero evidence in that respect. Conclusion: I called YOU an idiot. Bump so you may humiliate yourself some more, it is very entertaining so far. What are you going to do now, dodge the point again?
Morar Santee	Posted - 2011.07.12 16:56:00 - [103] Actually, it's simply a moronic game mechanic to give high-sec griefers a 100% chance to walk free without loss, 100% of the time. The issue isn't that the people using Orcas swap to a better ship and kill someone. The problem is that they get pwned regularly enough, but instantly switch to a shuttle and warp out. Solution is simple: If ship maintenance array is used, the Orca pilot is forwarded all flags of the parties using the array. Effect: Miners etc. can still switch ships when aggressed, but griefers lose their invincible walk free card. Want to use an Orca to win at high-sec griefing? Fine. Risk vs reward says you stupid ****er should better bring a fleet to keep it alive.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 17:42:00 - [104] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon Do you always insult people who point out you're the one who screwed up, or do you still not understand you got yourself blown up? :-D Which is it? Stupidity or delusion? Aww, did I hurt your feelings? You're the one that tossed the first insult and now you want to whine? boo hoo. Cry more ya hypocrite. Maybe you can dock your personality in your orca and get a new one, rather than being exposed as a simpleton. P.S. Thanks for the bump You think you hurt my feelings? snorts, amused When did you manage that? Dude - you're now a laughing stock on these forums. You a) fell for the oldest bait in the game, b) were too dumb to run when it because painfully obvious twice that you were about to get ganked, and b) - worst of all - made the tragi-comic error of whinging about it here :-D You haven't hurt my feelings you poor fool. You've provided non-stop amusement from your first post chuckles But hey, if - like realising you were the reason you got blown away - you need to believe you've hurt my feelings (I can't even type that with a straight face :-D ), that's cool with me. In fact I encourage you to spread this thread around as much as possible. Link it everywhere. Make it your sig. After all you're not a dumb **** who keeps digging his hole deeper. No, you're the poor put upon hero, who was the tragic victim of an unfair tactic by a nasty wasty pirate, who no doubt Needs To Be Taught A LessonÖ. -- The Door!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 17:46:00 - [105] Originally by: Morar Santee Actually, it's simply a moronic game mechanic to give high-sec griefers a 100% chance to walk free without loss, 100% of the time. The issue isn't that the people using Orcas swap to a better ship and kill someone. The problem is that they get pwned regularly enough, but instantly switch to a shuttle and warp out. Solution is simple: If ship maintenance array is used, the Orca pilot is forwarded all flags of the parties using the array. Effect: Miners etc. can still switch ships when aggressed, but griefers lose their invincible walk free card. Want to use an Orca to win at high-sec griefing? Fine. Risk vs reward says you stupid ****er should better bring a fleet to keep it alive. How do you differentiate between miners and non-miners? And don't say 'because he has a mining mod fit', cause then you've clearly not seen or heard of the many wonderful 'when miners fight back' incidents in Eve. -- The Door!
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises	Posted - 2011.07.12 18:08:00 - [106] Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Morar Santee Actually, it's simply a moronic game mechanic to give high-sec griefers a 100% chance to walk free without loss, 100% of the time. The issue isn't that the people using Orcas swap to a better ship and kill someone. The problem is that they get pwned regularly enough, but instantly switch to a shuttle and warp out. Solution is simple: If ship maintenance array is used, the Orca pilot is forwarded all flags of the parties using the array. Effect: Miners etc. can still switch ships when aggressed, but griefers lose their invincible walk free card. Want to use an Orca to win at high-sec griefing? Fine. Risk vs reward says you stupid ****er should better bring a fleet to keep it alive. How do you differentiate between miners and non-miners? And don't say 'because he has a mining mod fit', cause then you've clearly not seen or heard of the many wonderful 'when miners fight back' incidents in Eve. Pretty simple. A miner doesn't pull aggression then swap ships. Usually goes the other way around. Thus, the orca won't have an aggression timer in that situation. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.12 18:32:00 - [107] Originally by: Bagehi Pretty simple. A miner doesn't pull aggression then swap ships. Usually goes the other way around. Thus, the orca won't have an aggression timer in that situation. That would create an 'invisible aggression' exploit/feature using ship maintenance bay and fitting service though. Now I agree the orca switcheroo is kinda lame, as is the neutral logistics and pretty much everything that concerns hisec pvp. But its not worth opening THAT can of worms for it.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.12 18:40:00 - [108] Originally by: Bagehi Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Morar Santee Actually, it's simply a moronic game mechanic to give high-sec griefers a 100% chance to walk free without loss, 100% of the time. The issue isn't that the people using Orcas swap to a better ship and kill someone. The problem is that they get pwned regularly enough, but instantly switch to a shuttle and warp out. Solution is simple: If ship maintenance array is used, the Orca pilot is forwarded all flags of the parties using the array. Effect: Miners etc. can still switch ships when aggressed, but griefers lose their invincible walk free card. Want to use an Orca to win at high-sec griefing? Fine. Risk vs reward says you stupid ****er should better bring a fleet to keep it alive. How do you differentiate between miners and non-miners? And don't say 'because he has a mining mod fit', cause then you've clearly not seen or heard of the many wonderful 'when miners fight back' incidents in Eve. Pretty simple. A miner doesn't pull aggression then swap ships. Usually goes the other way around. Thus, the orca won't have an aggression timer in that situation. Puts a hell of a damper on using ECM or combat drones with your barge, or ECM mods (if a mining BS is being used) for defence, or to break target lock to jump away. I've killed attacking frigates, dessies and even really dumb cruiser pilots with my miners' combat drones, and often carry ECM drones to break lock. I don't just sit there and get ganked. Also I still say it's bloody unfortunate for the unwitting Orca pilot who has some dumb or malicious corpmate aggro another player, and then dock. Really I don't think yours is a winning idea, but I agree it would be nice to make it a tad tougher for Orcas to be used as get out of jail for free cards. I'm just not sure how you'd go about it without breaking the game for others, as I point out above. -- The Door!
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.07.12 18:54:00 - [109] Just add a straight aggro timer to ship-change like we already have for docking and jumping, 30s-45s would be more than enough to make the trick much harder to use (still viable against utter morons though). Refitting need not be impacted at all. No need to change anything else really.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 19:13:00 - [110] Originally by: Toovhon Ego protecting crap Yeah, and the issue is being discussed. Don't let obvious smack you in the face, you apparently can't recognize it. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 19:16:00 - [111] Originally by: Omara Otawan Care to point out where I said anything like that again? Oh wait, you cant. Cause I don't need to. :) Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.12 19:18:00 - [112] Originally by: Toovhon Also I still say it's bloody unfortunate for the unwitting Orca pilot who has some dumb or malicious corpmate aggro another player, and then dock. This is why the docking transfers agro is problematic. Denying use of the array while the player is red boxed is the most clean solution. Sandbox Protection League
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.12 19:24:00 - [113] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Omara Otawan Care to point out where I said anything like that again? Oh wait, you cant. Cause I don't need to. :) Heh, I kinda suspected you were a troll when I couldnt find any killmail of the incident. Good amount of bites though, well played sir.
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises	Posted - 2011.07.12 19:28:00 - [114] Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Bagehi Pretty simple. A miner doesn't pull aggression then swap ships. Usually goes the other way around. Thus, the orca won't have an aggression timer in that situation. Puts a hell of a damper on using ECM or combat drones with your barge, or ECM mods (if a mining BS is being used) for defence, or to break target lock to jump away. I've killed attacking frigates, dessies and even really dumb cruiser pilots with my miners' combat drones, and often carry ECM drones to break lock. I don't just sit there and get ganked. Also I still say it's bloody unfortunate for the unwitting Orca pilot who has some dumb or malicious corpmate aggro another player, and then dock. Really I don't think yours is a winning idea, but I agree it would be nice to make it a tad tougher for Orcas to be used as get out of jail for free cards. I'm just not sure how you'd go about it without breaking the game for others, as I point out above. Why would you have to worry about using ECM/drones/etc if the purpose is to break the lock so you can warp? If you can warp and have to use an orca to switch ships out, you'd be doing that in a safe location where the orca will remain safe (like in a POS shield). If you've just beaten off an attacker with drones, why would you be switching out ships? Besides, Orcas usually aren't just left sitting somewhere AFK that isn't safe. Also, the Orca has to actually be in fleet, with the hangar access set for someone to interface with it in a way that could pass aggro. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.12 19:36:00 - [115] Originally by: Bagehi Also, the Orca has to actually be in fleet, with the hangar access set for someone to interface with it in a way that could pass aggro. Which is exactly the problem, invisible aggro transfer. Since the Orca hangars are just regular hangar arrays, that would apply to all ships with these facilities. Bad idea, way too much griefing potential for hisec, and way too exploitable for low/null as well.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.13 02:04:00 - [116] Originally by: Bagehi Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Bagehi Pretty simple. A miner doesn't pull aggression then swap ships. Usually goes the other way around. Thus, the orca won't have an aggression timer in that situation. Puts a hell of a damper on using ECM or combat drones with your barge, or ECM mods (if a mining BS is being used) for defence, or to break target lock to jump away. I've killed attacking frigates, dessies and even really dumb cruiser pilots with my miners' combat drones, and often carry ECM drones to break lock. I don't just sit there and get ganked. Also I still say it's bloody unfortunate for the unwitting Orca pilot who has some dumb or malicious corpmate aggro another player, and then dock. Really I don't think yours is a winning idea, but I agree it would be nice to make it a tad tougher for Orcas to be used as get out of jail for free cards. I'm just not sure how you'd go about it without breaking the game for others, as I point out above. Why would you have to worry about using ECM/drones/etc if the purpose is to break the lock so you can warp? If you can warp and have to use an orca to switch ships out, you'd be doing that in a safe location where the orca will remain safe (like in a POS shield). If you've just beaten off an attacker with drones, why would you be switching out ships? Besides, Orcas usually aren't just left sitting somewhere AFK that isn't safe. Also, the Orca has to actually be in fleet, with the hangar access set for someone to interface with it in a way that could pass aggro. Why would I worry about ECM if I want to break a lock? Huh? What are you on about? You do know what ECM mods and drones are for, right? -- The Door!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.13 02:10:00 - [117] Originally by: Adunh Slavy LAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAH! I CAN'T HEAR YOUUUUU! LAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAHLAH I'M NOT LISTENINNNNNNGGGG ears covered with hands LAHLAHLAHLAHLAH! Be sure to return with more posts of how nasty unfair pirates killed your dumb arse over and over :-D -- The Door!
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.13 03:56:00 - [118] Originally by: Toovhon Also I still say it's bloody unfortunate for the unwitting Orca pilot who has some dumb or malicious corpmate aggro another player, and then dock. Exactly. Which is precisely why aggro should NOT transfer to the Orca. Keep in mind that an Orca used for legitimate purposes (PvP is also legitimate, but you know what I mean) cannot be held responsible for a jerk or noob doing something dumb. And keep even further in mind that access to the Orca's ship maintenance bay is fleet-based; that's pretty broad. So, the Orca pilot may just be rendering docking services to people who aren't even in his corp. It takes only 1 jerk from a different corp, for instance, to really screw the totally innocent Orca pilot over. -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.13 07:47:00 - [119] Penny Arcade explains why the OP sucks :-D -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.13 22:26:00 - [120] Originally by: Toovhon Be sure to return with more posts of how nasty unfair pirates killed your dumb arse over and over :-D Be sure to let me know when your opinion not only become relevant, but are also facts. Sandbox Protection League
Chester A Nimitz	Posted - 2011.07.13 22:30:00 - [121] QQ MORE
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.13 22:32:00 - [122] Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Toovhon Also I still say it's bloody unfortunate for the unwitting Orca pilot who has some dumb or malicious corpmate aggro another player, and then dock. And keep even further in mind that access to the Orca's ship maintenance bay is fleet-based; that's pretty broad. So, the Orca pilot may just be rendering docking services to people who aren't even in his corp. It takes only 1 jerk from a different corp, for instance, to really screw the totally innocent Orca pilot over. This is certainly a problem with transfering the agro to the orca pilot. The pilot being attacked, also being denied the ability to dock/swap is a good comprimise. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.14 02:32:00 - [123] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon Be sure to return with more posts of how nasty unfair pirates killed your dumb arse over and over :-D Be sure to let me know when your opinion not only become relevant, but are also facts. No now anyone who points out you failed is a liar? :-D Best edit your OP then... -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.14 05:03:00 - [124] Originally by: Toovhon So now anyone who points out you failed is a liar? :-D Best edit your OP then... Your reading comprehension skills are bested by a slug. Sandbox Protection League
Kusanagi Kasuga	Posted - 2011.07.14 15:30:00 - [125] Ultimately, you missed the real problem. There is no 'design philosophy' that says a player must commit to a fight - otherwise ECM, WCS, and other methods of disengaging would not exist. Nor is there an assumption that what you think you're fighting is what you see - he could just as easily have brought some friends to play (and would have if you had been able to hold tank for too long) If you were better informed, you would have known that this is a standard ninja tactic - he wasn't stealing your loot - he wanted to kill you. You took the bait. The only problem here is that there is no way for you to spring his trap on him, and kill the orca. When that is fixed, life will be more interesting for ninjas and victims both.
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises	Posted - 2011.07.14 16:44:00 - [126] Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Bagehi Why would you have to worry about using ECM/drones/etc if the purpose is to break the lock so you can warp? If you can warp and have to use an orca to switch ships out, you'd be doing that in a safe location where the orca will remain safe (like in a POS shield). If you've just beaten off an attacker with drones, why would you be switching out ships? Besides, Orcas usually aren't just left sitting somewhere AFK that isn't safe. Also, the Orca has to actually be in fleet, with the hangar access set for someone to interface with it in a way that could pass aggro. Why would I worry about ECM if I want to break a lock? Huh? What are you on about? You do know what ECM mods and drones are for, right? Why worry about transferring aggro at that point? You've hopefully broken the lock, you've warped out, safe up and wait it out if that was what you were planning to do. If you were planning to switch ships, then do it from the orca that is in the safe you just warped to, where the transfer of an aggro counter won't do anything negatively to it. Did you even read the rest of the paragraph I wrote or just the first sentence? You're started to look like a troll. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Grog Barrel	Posted - 2011.07.14 17:24:00 - [127] Solution: Orca is protecting a pilot who aggro'd you knowing the situation, thus orca should become red box to you too.
Gizznitt Malikite Agony Unleashed	Posted - 2011.07.14 21:04:00 - [128] You can't board a ship that's targeted. I think its a good idea that you can't dock a ship that's targetted either..... with the exceptions of stations and outposts (o.w. station games would take on a whole new aspect!). Docking your Faction BS into a carrier to save it from destruction is such a pansy use of the game mechanics that it really ought to be changed....
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.15 06:33:00 - [129] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon So now anyone who points out you failed is a liar? :-D Best edit your OP then... Your reading comprehension skills are bested by a slug. LOL. Wow, you are one sad little man :-D Nonetheless your original tears over your very own !@#$up remain for all to see. -- The Door!
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.15 06:39:00 - [130] Originally by: Bagehi Originally by: Toovhon Originally by: Bagehi Why would you have to worry about using ECM/drones/etc if the purpose is to break the lock so you can warp? If you can warp and have to use an orca to switch ships out, you'd be doing that in a safe location where the orca will remain safe (like in a POS shield). If you've just beaten off an attacker with drones, why would you be switching out ships? Besides, Orcas usually aren't just left sitting somewhere AFK that isn't safe. Also, the Orca has to actually be in fleet, with the hangar access set for someone to interface with it in a way that could pass aggro. Why would I worry about ECM if I want to break a lock? Huh? What are you on about? You do know what ECM mods and drones are for, right? Why worry about transferring aggro at that point? You've hopefully broken the lock, you've warped out, safe up and wait it out if that was what you were planning to do. If you were planning to switch ships, then do it from the orca that is in the safe you just warped to, where the transfer of an aggro counter won't do anything negatively to it. Did you even read the rest of the paragraph I wrote or just the first sentence? You're started to look like a troll. The suggestion was made that I needn't gain aggro before docking. I said I often do need ECM mods/drones or combat drones (though if I need to bring them out, my chances are usually very slim, but !@#$ it, I'll try anything to escape :-) ) to escape. You then said "Why would you have to worry about using ECM/drones/etc if the purpose is to break the lock so you can warp?". I basically said "...". The upshot is if you can't see why I'd sometimes need to gain aggro to get away from an attempted gank, you've obviously never had someone try to gank you. So really - what are you on about and why are you trying to call me a troll? You're the one suggesting I never fight back, which makes no sense in many situations where I'm scrammed. -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.15 16:25:00 - [131] Originally by: Toovhon LOL. Wow, you are one sad little man :-D Nonetheless your original tears over your very own !@#$up remain for all to see. The amusing part is that you think I'm upset. The sad part is that you and a few others feel that anyone who makes a suggestion does so for selfish reasons. Sorry to harm your world view, but not everyone is a self centered prick like your self. As for the issue of the thread, thanks for participating. ;) Sandbox Protection League
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation RvB - RED Federation	Posted - 2011.07.15 17:17:00 - [132] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon LOL. Wow, you are one sad little man :-D Nonetheless your original tears over your very own !@#$up remain for all to see. The amusing part is that you think I'm upset. The sad part is that you and a few others feel that anyone who makes a suggestion does so for selfish reasons. Sorry to harm your world view, but not everyone is a self centered prick like your self. As for the issue of the thread, thanks for participating. ;) It obviously bothered you enough to post this thread then spend 5 pages defending it. Sounds like you're kind of upset to me. This is a well known tactic and you made multiple errors that resulted in your death. Let me reiterate you lost this fight through your own stupidity not because of the Orca's ship maintenance bay. You are also quite hypocritical, The guy flipped you in a Vigil, I note that when you ran back and grabbed another ship you didn't pick up a T1 frig to give him a "fair" fight you brought back a T2 ship. Lets break that down. You are mad because the Pirate switched into a superior ship after you switched into a superior ship. Now lets go down your mistakes. First you engaged a a can thief, this is a mistake because the only reason people will steal from your can in a mission is to get you to aggress which means he expects to be able to win. Now do you really think a vigil stands much chance of killing a mission BS before he ran off or you blew his ship up? No the Vigil was used to get dumbasses like yourself to engage thinking you'll get an easy kill. Any reasonably intelligent individual would know that he would be using a different ship for actual combat. You didn't which is my justification for the first sentence in this paragraph. You're idiocy in this case is slightly mitigated by the fact that you grabbed a different (cheaper) ship to actually engage him in. You're next mistake was not recognizing what the orca landing in the mission pocket meant. This is a very commonly used tactic which you should have known about, Even so it was an unknown variable in the situation and that change should have been enough for you to re-evaluate the situation and decide to gtfo. You're final mistake and the one that cost you your ship is that as soon as you lost lock and he switched ships that should have been your signal to GTFO. It was going to take a couple seconds to lock and you could probably get outside of point range and warp away in that time. You were in an Interceptor so it's not like it would have taken you long to align to warp out. As far as using the Orca's maintenance bay being a cheesy tactic, sure but it's just one more in a long list of cheesy tactics. He could just as easily warped back to a station to have his bigger ship ready when you got back from grabbing your Inty. Face it you're just mad because he out thought you. You thought YOU would be the one to get an easy kill but instead he turned the tables on you. But please do cry moar your tears are quite tasty.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.16 02:31:00 - [133] Originally by: Skex Relbore <more bull ** from a air bag> Your error, along with the rest of your ilk is the assumption I am mad about loosing the fight. I encountered an imbalance, an imbalance I knew existed but had yet to experience first hand. Now that I have, I can speak to it. The annoying thing is this all too common Eve tough guy attitude. You give me , I throw it right back in your face. I'm not afraid of being called a carebear or shrink in fear from stupid comments like "go back to wow", etc. An imbalance exists, in my view it should be addressed. You need to defend the cheesy tactic by calling someone names and going after the messenger. You're full of **, deal with it. You're just another fake tough guy sitting behind your screen. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.16 06:45:00 - [134] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon LOL. Wow, you are one sad little man :-D Nonetheless your original tears over your very own !@#$up remain for all to see. The amusing part is that you think I'm upset. The sad part is that you and a few others feel that anyone who makes a suggestion does so for selfish reasons. Sorry to harm your world view, but not everyone is a self centered prick like your self. As for the issue of the thread, thanks for participating. ;) No, you're not upset, are you? :-D You've not spent five pages crying about your stupidity getting yourself killed, nor have you abused anyone and everyone who pointed out the realities of the situation. pats you gently on your back There there. There there. Life is just so unfair, isn't it? Ah dear, it's just too funny. I wonder how long you can be goaded into continuing to embarrass yourself? Oh, and don't hesitate to share your future !@#$ups :-) Someone like yourself ought to be a near endless source of amusing pratfalls in Eve grins -- The Door!
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.16 08:28:00 - [135] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 16/07/2011 08:30:18 Originally by: Grog Barrel Solution: Orca is protecting a pilot who aggro'd you knowing the situation, thus orca should become red box to you too. Effect: Orca pilots cannot allow anyone access to their hangar apart from their own alts, since that would be just an open invitation to have your orca flagged and ganked. Aggro transfer like that does not show in the UI. The poor bastard has no way of knowing someone can legally shoot him in hisec, or that he will not disappear after logging off in lowsec/nullsec/wspace. Now I am all for griefing and ganking, but invisible aggro timers the victim has no chance to notice is just plain stupid.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.07.16 11:17:00 - [136] Originally by: Omara Otawan .... You sure assist flags add the PvP timer for logoff, doesn't for RR as neutral logis seem to disappear just fine. Not hidden timers either as you get the flawed ticker in left hand/top. The problem with aggro solution is that the Orca is technically "innocent" as he just happened to be there in his mining support craft with fleet members who just happened to shoot stuff Adding the run of the mill docking timer for all maintenance arrays is by far the least intrusive solution. Will require minimal adjustment to account for in the field, except when a whole fleet absolutely positively has to change to frigs mid combat!!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.16 21:21:00 - [137] Originally by: Toovhon More fake tough guy bull **** LOL, I've nothing to be embrassed by. I'm not the one showing my ass, you are. You jack offs just can't help your selves. Too funny. Keep going. :) Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.16 21:23:00 - [138] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Adding the run of the mill docking timer for all maintenance arrays is by far the least intrusive solution. Will require minimal adjustment to account for in the field, except when a whole fleet absolutely positively has to change to frigs mid combat!! This is likely the least expensive, in terms of code, to implement. Sandbox Protection League
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.16 22:01:00 - [139] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 16/07/2011 22:03:27 Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Adding the run of the mill docking timer for all maintenance arrays is by far the least intrusive solution. Will require minimal adjustment to account for in the field, except when a whole fleet absolutely positively has to change to frigs mid combat!! Yes, it would just leave the question why a friendly carrier would refuse a friendly ship docking rights for attacking an enemy. Makes sense for stations and gates as they are neutral entities, for ships of your own corp/alliance/fleet not so much. Arbitrary answers like "it works better that way" dont really cut it here, given how wormhole jump/spawn mechanics work. Edit: Given that the whole 'issue' is pretty much irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and ontop of that is easily being avoided by just a little common sense, I still see no valid reason to touch it.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.17 00:12:00 - [140] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 16/07/2011 22:03:27 Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Adding the run of the mill docking timer for all maintenance arrays is by far the least intrusive solution. Will require minimal adjustment to account for in the field, except when a whole fleet absolutely positively has to change to frigs mid combat!! Yes, it would just leave the question why a friendly carrier would refuse a friendly ship docking rights for attacking an enemy. Makes sense for stations and gates as they are neutral entities, for ships of your own corp/alliance/fleet not so much. Arbitrary answers like "it works better that way" dont really cut it here, given how wormhole jump/spawn mechanics work. Edit: Given that the whole 'issue' is pretty much irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and ontop of that is easily being avoided by just a little common sense, I still see no valid reason to touch it. Common sense? You won't see any of that from the OP. He thinks he's being persecuted and 'rationalises' away any and all counter argument as trolling attacks. P.S. How long do you think I can keep him embarrassing himself here for? :-) Five pages so far! -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.17 04:15:00 - [141] Originally by: Toovhon P.S. How long do you think I can keep him embarrassing himself here for? :-) Five pages so far! LOL, keep it up. Show the world how much of an ass you truely are. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.17 06:09:00 - [142] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon P.S. How long do you think I can keep him embarrassing himself here for? :-) Five pages so far! LOL, keep it up. Show the world how much of an ass you truely are. How many supports have you got, again? :-D Nah, you're not wrong, are you? snickers P.S. If you can't spell, at least use a spellchecker. -- The Door!
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.17 06:50:00 - [143] Originally by: Skex Relbore It obviously bothered you enough to post this thread then spend 5 pages defending it. I'd say he spent as much time defending as you guys spent attacking him. Quote: (...) you made multiple errors that resulted in your death. Let me reiterate you lost this fight through your own stupidity not because of the Orca's ship maintenance bay. Yes, he handled the situation very poorly, like a noob really, and got shot to smithereens. However, try and not fall into the trap I did at first too: mocking him for his gameplay at the expensive of the legit issue he brings up. When you got a player aggro timer on you, you're not supposed to dock up for a while (or jump gate). The Orca offers a way around that, in the form of what clearly appears to be a loophole. The only logical way to deal with this, therefore, is to close the loophole, and suspend the offender's docking privileges to the Orca's ship maintenance bay for the duration of the aggro timer as well. Again, try and separate the logic of this reasoning from thinking about the circumstances of the fight; because they're irrelevant, really. It would, in fact, have been much wiser had the OP not mentioned the fight at all, and just outlined the issue. Alas, he didn't. Doesn't mean you can't strain yourself a little to distill the abstract of the matter at hand here, and base your vote on that. -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.07.17 09:43:00 - [144] Originally by: Omara Otawan Yes, it would just leave the question why a friendly carrier would refuse a friendly ship docking rights for attacking an enemy.... The PF/RP side of things was sacrificed on the altar of balance a long time ago. Why does a friendly player controlled station disallow docking? The issue exists solely because of a sub-cap (the Orca) having a maintenance array with no restrictions. Even the bigger Rorqual has severe limitations: Quote: Due to its specialization towards industrial operations, its ship maintenance bay is able to accommodate only industrial ships, mining barges and their tech 2 variants If people can't agree on having the same aggression mechanics apply across the board, then apply the Rorqual indy-only restrictions to the Orca. Problem solved. Carriers are unaffected and RP/PF is satisfied, the only 'losers' are high-sec "PvP'ers".
Lady Spank Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.07.17 10:52:00 - [145] Supported: The cowardly risk-free PVP that Orca and carrier hot-swapping allows is completely at odds with the risk/reward model of Eve. ~~~
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.17 23:37:00 - [146] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida If people can't agree on having the same aggression mechanics apply across the board, then apply the Rorqual indy-only restrictions to the Orca. Far better I think to simply apply a cooldown to ships with aggro docking inside an Orca. It still shafts innocent people who try to escape inside an Orca from an agressor, and use ECM or combat mods/drones to get away to the safety of the Orca (and thus gain aggro). But at least it wouldn't gimp the Orca as you suggest doing so :-) But really I think the best solution is the one we have now, where it's not perfect, but isn't as bad as the 'fixes' being suggested. Carebears can suck it up when they fall into an obvious trap, and PvPers can live with their targets sometimes escaping inside an Orca. Adapt or die. Don't try to 'fix' Eve till it's stuffed. -- The Door!
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.07.17 23:49:00 - [147] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida If people can't agree on having the same aggression mechanics apply across the board, then apply the Rorqual indy-only restrictions to the Orca. That would be a reasonable solution indeed. Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Edit: To compensate the 2-3 people who use the Orca to actually haul assembled ships around which was the reason for not restricting its bay, give JF' and/or Freighters the ability to carry assembled ships. They already have that ability, you can make a courier contract and stick the plastic package in the cargo.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.18 00:41:00 - [148] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Hirana Yoshida If people can't agree on having the same aggression mechanics apply across the board, then apply the Rorqual indy-only restrictions to the Orca. That would be a reasonable solution indeed. It certainly would NOT be. Orca can haul all sorts of ships; that's one of its assets and charms. Applying a simple non-docking period to people with aggro is both in line with the already existing rules, and it's clean and simple. -- "All your monies AUR belong to us." -- CCP
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.18 15:54:00 - [149] Originally by: Toovhon How many supports have you got, again? :-D Nah, you're not wrong, are you? snickers P.S. If you can't spell, at least use a spellchecker. ROFL - You've stooped to the lowest level of internet debate, you're now a grammar ****. Classic. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.18 15:59:00 - [150] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida If people can't agree on having the same aggression mechanics apply across the board, then apply the Rorqual indy-only restrictions to the Orca. That's an interesting take on the issue as well. Sandbox Protection League
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.18 16:05:00 - [151] Originally by: Ranka Mei Again, try and separate the logic of this reasoning from thinking about the circumstances of the fight; because they're irrelevant, really. It would, in fact, have been much wiser had the OP not mentioned the fight at all, and just outlined the issue. Alas, he didn't. Doesn't mean you can't strain yourself a little to distill the abstract of the matter at hand here, and base your vote on that. You know, had I done that, the very same chest thumping clowns would have said "Did you loose a ship noob?" or some other such comments. I choose to lay it all out and throw their crap back in their faces. I did this from the very first post, there are no edits there. My reactions and format of this thread have been quite deliberate. Sandbox Protection League
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation RvB - RED Federation	Posted - 2011.07.18 16:26:00 - [152] Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Skex Relbore It obviously bothered you enough to post this thread then spend 5 pages defending it. I'd say he spent as much time defending as you guys spent attacking him. I'm not the one who created the post, I'm just making fun of him. Quote: Quote: (...) you made multiple errors that resulted in your death. Let me reiterate you lost this fight through your own stupidity not because of the Orca's ship maintenance bay. Yes, he handled the situation very poorly, like a noob really, and got shot to smithereens. However, try and not fall into the trap I did at first too: mocking him for his gameplay at the expensive of the legit issue he brings up. You are missing my actual point. It's not that he fell into a trap it's that he's being a hypocrite for complaining about someone shipping up to a more powerful ship after he went and shipped up to a more powerful ship. Quote: When you got a player aggro timer on you, you're not supposed to dock up for a while (or jump gate). The Orca offers a way around that, in the form of what clearly appears to be a loophole. The only logical way to deal with this, therefore, is to close the loophole, and suspend the offender's docking privileges to the Orca's ship maintenance bay for the duration of the aggro timer as well. Such a mechanic wouldn't have changed the outcome in this case if the OP was cleared of aggression timers blocking docking to switch to his interceptor from his mission ship. The Pirate would have been free of any aggression timers to swap a ship from the Orca's maintenance bay. Quote: Again, try and separate the logic of this reasoning from thinking about the circumstances of the fight; because they're irrelevant, really. It would, in fact, have been much wiser had the OP not mentioned the fight at all, and just outlined the issue. Alas, he didn't. Doesn't mean you can't strain yourself a little to distill the abstract of the matter at hand here, and base your vote on that. EVE is rife with imbalances and lopsided mechanics. Knowing those is a part of success/failure in the game. There are so many things in this game that need attention more than this "issue" things that actually rate developer time and affect more than the occasional mission runner who is stupid enough to try and fight a ninja. I mean come on there are only two circumstances people engage in combat in this game. When they have an edge they are pretty sure will give them victory or they don't have a choice. This is a situation where the OP thought he had that edge when he went and got his Inty, only to learn that he did not as his opponent swapped into a strategic cruiser.
Page Starcaster	Posted - 2011.07.18 20:33:00 - [153] Edited by: Page Starcaster on 18/07/2011 20:35:02 The only change I could see wanting in this situation is the Orca pilot should have got agro for interacting/supporting him. Would have been really funny if he warped in his orca, got into his loki only to lose the orca. I agree that the OP only died from his own stupidity, but being able to swap ships at an ORCA ship maintenance bay while under agro without the orca pilot getting agro is not right. This should either not be allowed or the ORCA should gain agro from interacting with the player who has agro. What if the OP had got the loki down into structure and then the aggressor switched to another ship to avoid losing his Loki. That would definitely be an exploit. And probably would have happened if the OP was strong enough. You can not be allowed to support an agroed character without becoming agroed yourself, it is the same principal of getting remote repped by a neutral, they fixed that, now fix this.
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.18 22:28:00 - [154] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon How many supports have you got, again? :-D Nah, you're not wrong, are you? snickers P.S. If you can't spell, at least use a spellchecker. ROFL - You've stooped to the lowest level of internet debate, you're now a grammar ****. Classic. So how many supports was that? :-D -- The Door!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2011.07.20 07:47:00 - [155] Originally by: Toovhon So how many supports was that? :-D LOL, doesn't matter. You prooved you're a complete ass, mission accomplished. Sandbox Protection League
Toovhon	Posted - 2011.07.20 11:30:00 - [156] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Toovhon So how many supports was that? :-D LOL, doesn't matter. You prooved you're a complete ass, mission accomplished. Still no spellchecker, huh? And wow - no one noticed how you just pretended not to notice that for it's length your thread is just about the worst supported in Eve forum history. Bravo on your excellent misdirection there! Bravo sir! Well played! :-D -- The Door!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one 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.