Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute? If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.
In other words, in your recent blog you say that bringing a ship into battle should be a commitment, without the possibility to simply log off when things not going well.
Why is it still possible then, to log off after jump and simply disappear after a min? Sure, most ships wont survive 1 min at a big enough gate camp.
Im talking about the ships which will.
Good tanked BS's even BC's, Orca's and Freighters come into my mind, which always have the possibility to escape, when there are only a handful of tacklers and damagedealers attacking.
One minute wont be enough in many cases. (also because you simply dont notice THAT they log off)
Why dont they get the 15 min aggro, even if they are engaged after log off? I dont see the difference. They commited their ship to battle as they jumped through that WH/GATE, they shouldnt be able to escape like that.
I fully understand that some people have real issues with their isp and therefore have real disconnects during play, but i doubt that this happens more commonly than the exploit im talking about here. Also, if i know that i have issues with my isp, i dont fly my ship to dangerous regions, simple as that.
Maybe CCP can explain further on this topic? |

Sentient Blade
Walk It Off Coalition of the Unfortunate
57
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Everyone knows that attacking targets that are not fighting back is just such hard work. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Everyone knows that attacking targets that are not fighting back is just such hard work.
You missed the topic. |

De'Veldrin
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:Everyone knows that attacking targets that are not fighting back is just such hard work. You missed the topic.
No I think he hit the nail pretty much on the head. Unsub or don't.-á I don't care what your reasons are, and neither does anyone else.-á Just click the button and go away - or don't. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:56:00 -
[5] - Quote
De'Veldrin wrote:Nautsyn Thome wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:Everyone knows that attacking targets that are not fighting back is just such hard work. You missed the topic. No I think he hit the nail pretty much on the head.
So you both say, its perfectly fine to exploit this mechanic? Or in other words, you say when i dont have enough dps at hand, the target it legitimated to escape?
I think i dont understand you, cause this makes no sense at all. |

Sir Willy
Phantom Squad Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
You said it yourself... "when i dont have enough dps at hand"
If you don't have enough DPS to drop a ship that cannot fight back within the minute timer, the problem is not CCP's, it is yours. It is unrealistic to expect ships, especially ones w/o aggression to remain in space if someone aggresses it post-log out. Bring enough DPS to drop the freighter in under a minute, it's actually really easy. Look to 0.5 systems on trading pipes to see people dropping freighters in less than 10 seconds. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sir Willy wrote:You said it yourself... "when i dont have enough dps at hand"
If you don't have enough DPS to drop a ship that cannot fight back within the minute timer, the problem is not CCP's, it is yours. It is unrealistic to expect ships, especially ones w/o aggression to remain in space if someone aggresses it post-log out. Bring enough DPS to drop the freighter in under a minute, it's actually really easy. Look to 0.5 systems on trading pipes to see people dropping freighters in less than 10 seconds.
Im not talking about high sec ganks. Im talking about targets of opputunity.
Example: You are scouting your wormhole region, jumping through a wormhole and suddenly an orca warps right into you at 0. He jumps, and on the other side your corpmate gets the info that he has to tackle it. Orca decloaks, 2 Recons engaging it. Orca disapears after a min, in half armor.
I think this is wrong. |

Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
266
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
I'm pretty sure when you log off your mods and buffs go away so your ship is only tanking its base during that minute
just use moar DPS The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |

Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
266
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:11:00 -
[9] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Sir Willy wrote:You said it yourself... "when i dont have enough dps at hand"
If you don't have enough DPS to drop a ship that cannot fight back within the minute timer, the problem is not CCP's, it is yours. It is unrealistic to expect ships, especially ones w/o aggression to remain in space if someone aggresses it post-log out. Bring enough DPS to drop the freighter in under a minute, it's actually really easy. Look to 0.5 systems on trading pipes to see people dropping freighters in less than 10 seconds. Im not talking about high sec ganks. Im talking about targets of opputunity. Example: You are scouting your wormhole region, jumping through a wormhole and suddenly an orca warps right into you at 0. He jumps, and on the other side your corpmate gets the info that he has to tackle it. Orca decloaks, 2 Recons engaging it. Orca disapears after a min, in half armor. I think this is wrong.
and when it logs back on it will return to the same place in half armor
like my ex used to tell me, commitment is a two way street 
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:20:00 -
[10] - Quote
Morganta wrote:I'm pretty sure when you log off your mods and buffs go away so your ship is only tanking its base during that minute
just use moar DPS
So if the victim doesnt manage to log off soon enough it's perfectly fine that his timer gets extended by 15 minutes, which will be more than sufficient to kill anything (since you have time to call in reinforcments) but hey, if he logs off soon enough than its clearly fair and legitimate that he will disappear after 1 min?
I get your point and can live with it.
It just makes no sense at all, after the recent changes to the aggro timer.
|
|

Sir Willy
Phantom Squad Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Sir Willy wrote:You said it yourself... "when i dont have enough dps at hand"
If you don't have enough DPS to drop a ship that cannot fight back within the minute timer, the problem is not CCP's, it is yours. It is unrealistic to expect ships, especially ones w/o aggression to remain in space if someone aggresses it post-log out. Bring enough DPS to drop the freighter in under a minute, it's actually really easy. Look to 0.5 systems on trading pipes to see people dropping freighters in less than 10 seconds. Im not talking about high sec ganks. Im talking about targets of opputunity. Example: You are scouting your wormhole region, jumping through a wormhole and suddenly an orca warps right into you at 0. He jumps, and on the other side your corpmate gets the info that he has to tackle it. Orca decloaks, 2 Recons engaging it. Orca disapears after a min, in half armor. I think this is wrong.
I wasn't talking about hisec ganks either. I was just mearly using them as an example of people organized enough to drop a freighter or any other ship short of a supercap within the 1 min timer. Simple answer is bring more DPS and don't engage unless you know you can kill it.
If your two recons can't drop the orca, bring more recons/dps. If orca does manage to escape the 1 min timer, wait for a bit. Chances are, they'll log back in to see if they're still in a ship within 15 min or so. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
As you may guessed, the above example with the orca really happened to us, and we waited for 2 hours.
The thing is, i perfectly understand the orca pilot, he used this mechanic perfectly and escaped. It was in his wormhole and why should he risk it to log back in, if he can log in the next day and warp away in perfect safety.
He didnt use a scout, he didnt use an escort and he gets away with it. Thats wrong. |

BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:22:00 -
[13] - Quote
You know what I really hate that isn't fixed by the current ideas? When we manage to find someone and trap them and they clear aggro, either by jumping through a gate (which is a really stupid way for CCP to clear aggro) or warping around for 15 minutes. But they are being actively hunted, so we scan them down right away, but by the time they are scanned down and we warp to them, we land just in time to see them disappear in space.
IMO extend the aggression timer if they get re-aggressed during this 1 minute. If I can scan someone down and warp to his last location and get 1 shot off on him, that should extend the aggression. That would prevent logging off from being a viable mechanic. As it stands, yea, they fixed it for supers, so if that's the only thing they intended then well done. But the statement seems pretty all encompassing, "logging off should not be a viable tactic", and if that's so, then there's still work that needs to be done. |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. The Lostboys
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
Falling into a trap is not "committing to battle". To commit to battle you actually have to shoot. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Falling into a trap is not "committing to battle". To commit to battle you actually have to shoot.
It wasnt even a trap, it was a mere coincidence that i landed on his side ot the wormhole as he landed right next to me and his careless attempt to fly through dangerous space turned into his favor by using an exploit. |

Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1470
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:32:00 -
[16] - Quote
trying to e-warp out of a bubble counts as logging with agression |

Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1470
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:33:00 -
[17] - Quote
basically just don't be a bubbleless scrub |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:39:00 -
[18] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:basically just don't be a bubbleless scrub
Just try to understand my first post and that what CCP Tallest wrote. You dont need a bubble to tackle an orca. But you need more time than 1 minute to bring more dps when you are just a scout without bubble.
All i want it to understand, why there is a difference to made between the recent change, and the above mentioned example.
Why does the orca deserve to get away, when it is clearly stated that logging off shouldnt be a viable tactic? |

Cyniac
Twilight Star Rangers Black Thorne Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:45:00 -
[19] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:It just makes no sense at all, after the recent changes to the aggro timer.
You know trying to make sense out of game mechanics generally does not end up well for those concerned. I hear it brings out the hounds of tindalos. |

Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
291
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:50:00 -
[20] - Quote
I actually agree with this. Don't bother with all these other people, they just like having something to complain about in everyone's post. It's CCP you need to convince, not them.
And if you think loudmouth's opinion (hey, i are one xD) matters that much, just take a quick look at the original thread proposing the removal of insurance about a month ago, and how the OP was bombarded. Yet, here we are. Rated ARG for Pirates. **** you. |
|

Sir Willy
Phantom Squad Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:52:00 -
[21] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Falling into a trap is not "committing to battle". To commit to battle you actually have to shoot. It wasnt even a trap, it was a mere coincidence that i landed on his side ot the wormhole as he landed right next to me and his careless attempt to fly through dangerous space turned into his favor by using an exploit.
Logging off is not an exploit FYI. Orca pilot used current game mechanics to his favor. You win some, you lose some. The difference between you and 99% of everyone else who plays Eve is that most people don't come to the forums and throw their toys from the pram when they miss a non-supercap kill. |

Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:54:00 -
[22] - Quote
Just becasue someone jumps though a gate or WH DOES NOT mean they have commited themselves to battle. You need to reword that. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
Montevius Williams wrote:Just becasue someone jumps though a gate or WH DOES NOT mean they have commited themselves to battle. You need to reword that.
True:
Flying through dangerous space without intel and without protection is not only risky, its an agreement to be engaged and destroyed by others.
And i correct myself:
Using a game mechanic to escape from mentioned example is not an exploit, as long as its defined as a legal mechanic.
Thus this thread and the call to CCP to look at this and change it. |

Petrus Blackshell
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:27:00 -
[24] - Quote
Buff frigates!
I approve of this. |

Ladie Harlot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
713
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:30:00 -
[25] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:when i dont have enough dps at hand, the target it legitimated to escape? Oh boy...
The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet. |

Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:06:00 -
[26] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Weaselior wrote:basically just don't be a bubbleless scrub Just try to understand my first post and that what CCP Tallest wrote. You dont need a bubble to tackle an orca. But you need more time than 1 minute to bring more dps when you are just a scout without bubble. All i want it to understand, why there is a difference to made between the recent change, and the above mentioned example. Why does the orca deserve to get away, when it is clearly stated that logging off shouldnt be a viable tactic?
Its you that doesnt understand. You dont require a bubble to tackle an orca, but u need it to make the orca agressed as he logs off. Use a bubble. Simple.
There are good reasons why you should dissappear soon after logging off under normal circumstances, and your experience does not in itself justify dropping the mechanic. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:52:00 -
[27] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Nautsyn Thome wrote:Weaselior wrote:basically just don't be a bubbleless scrub Just try to understand my first post and that what CCP Tallest wrote. You dont need a bubble to tackle an orca. But you need more time than 1 minute to bring more dps when you are just a scout without bubble. All i want it to understand, why there is a difference to made between the recent change, and the above mentioned example. Why does the orca deserve to get away, when it is clearly stated that logging off shouldnt be a viable tactic? Its you that doesnt understand. You dont require a bubble to tackle an orca, but u need it to make the orca agressed as he logs off. Use a bubble. Simple. There are good reasons why you should dissappear soon after logging off under normal circumstances, and your experience does not in itself justify dropping the mechanic.
Sorry but this is bullshit. I understood it the first time and now you suggest that it is justified to escape as long as you dont have a dictor within a minute to catch a logoffski.
I already catched it with my point, and only because a bubble autotriggers aggro at e-warp doesnt justify that this mechanic shouldnt work with a normal point.
My experience was just an example, and aslong as logging off shouldnt be a viable tactic to escape, i dont see why this should work on super's but not on smaller targets, only because you dont bring a blob within a minute.
Thats nonsense.
Also you would help this discussion if you would point out that good reasons you mentioned. |

Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:30:00 -
[28] - Quote
The rage this this "hAxp10i7" causes is justifyable enough to just leave it as is. I mean, who doesn't like when you make the other guy scream in anger that you got away and flipping the bird in the process  |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:36:00 -
[29] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:The rage this this "hAxp10i7" causes is justifyable enough to just leave it as is. I mean, who doesn't like when you make the other guy scream in anger that you got away and flipping the bird in the process 
I find it more depressing than rage about it. It's just a game i waste my time on. And the next time i wont waste 2 hours for that orca to relog... |

Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
137
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:48:00 -
[30] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:
Why dont they get the 15 min aggro, even if they are engaged after log off? I dont see the difference. They commited their ship to battle as they jumped through that WH/GATE, they shouldnt be able to escape like that.
Um, no. Jumping through a gate/wh does not commit one to battle. As you state here, someone unknowingly jumping through a gate/wh into a camp should have an automatic 15min hold on warp out. Sorry. That just doesn't cut it. 1) As long as they're cloaked in session change how did you engage them in battle? There was no commitment. 2) You've never actually jumped through a gate with a fleet, have you? You can find your entire fleet disconnected, clients crashed on a node that didn't handle the load. And oh, now you want to crawl around for 15 minutes picking them off? I don't think so.
I fully understand the idealism from which you want this. But, with current states of the game it would just mean a massacre for people jumping through gates/wh's. And that's why it shouldn't be.
The easiest solution is to have enough DPS at hand. Unfortunately, that isn't the case in all circumstances, log off mechanics not withstanding. Just gotta suck it up and deal with it. You win some. You lose some.
We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
|

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:12:00 -
[31] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote: Um, no. Jumping through a gate/wh does not commit one to battle. As you state here, someone unknowingly jumping through a gate/wh into a camp should have an automatic 15min hold on warp out.
Only if i put a point on him when he decloaks.
Mr Kidd wrote: 1) As long as they're cloaked in session change how did you engage them in battle? There was no commitment.
Thats right, because i had no point on him yet. When he logs off in that moment, he accepts that his ship will decloak and become vulnable.
Mr Kidd wrote: 2) You've never actually jumped through a gate with a fleet, have you? You can find your entire fleet disconnected, clients crashed on a node that didn't handle the load. And oh, now you want to crawl around for 15 minutes picking them off? I don't think so.
I did it many times, and sometimes there was so heavy lag, that i dont saw my ship exploding and just landed back to my clone station. In that situations i would be dead even if i had a 1 min timer anyway, because my ship didnt even warp away.
Mr Kidd wrote: I fully understand the idealism from which you want this. But, with current states of the game it would just mean a massacre for people jumping through gates/wh's. And that's why it shouldn't be.
Again this case would only apply to your node crash / heavy lag scenario.
Mr Kidd wrote: The easiest solution is to have enough DPS at hand. Unfortunately, that isn't the case in all circumstances, log off mechanics not withstanding. Just gotta suck it up and deal with it. You win some. You lose some.
Thats right. |

Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
142
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:38:00 -
[32] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Montevius Williams wrote:Just becasue someone jumps though a gate or WH DOES NOT mean they have commited themselves to battle. You need to reword that. True: Flying through dangerous space without intel and without protection is not only risky, its an agreement to be engaged and destroyed by others. And i correct myself: Using a game mechanic to escape from mentioned example is not an exploit, as long as its defined as a legal mechanic. Thus this thread and the call to CCP to look at this and change it.
And not bringing enough pilots to your gate camp so that you can insta pop a freighter is an agreement to allow all freighters to go free.
And unfortunately, CCP seems to be moving away from declaring game mechanics to be exploits. Corp/alliance hopping, dec shields, alt recycling, etc are all now allowed (and have been for some time without CCP announcing it).
But to be honest, I am actually on the side of the gankers. Ships which disconnect in space should remain in space for an extended period of time. On the other hand, ships should keep their modules active when they log off, so that they are still able to tank damage. This way players who DO disconnect due to ISP issues at least have a chance to log back in to save their ship. |

Nautsyn Thome
Shark Investments Shark-Investments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:41:00 -
[33] - Quote
Taedrin wrote: On the other hand, ships should keep their modules active when they log off, so that they are still able to tank damage. This way players who DO disconnect due to ISP issues at least have a chance to log back in to save their ship.
Thats a good suggestion. |

Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:05:00 -
[34] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote:Montevius Williams wrote:Just becasue someone jumps though a gate or WH DOES NOT mean they have commited themselves to battle. You need to reword that. True: Flying through dangerous space without intel and without protection is not only risky, (This is true) its an agreement to be engaged and destroyed by others. (This is false) Just becasue YOU think its an "agreement" does not make it so.And i correct myself: Using a game mechanic to escape from mentioned example is not an exploit, as long as its defined as a legal mechanic. Thus this thread and the call to CCP to look at this and change it.
The Dev blog states that if you are engage in battle and decide to log off becasuse you are loosing that battle, you will no longer dissapear and can be killed. If however you log before battle has commenced, you will dissapear as per normal game mechanics. I dont see anything wrong with this. |

Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:14:00 -
[35] - Quote
Nautsyn Thome wrote: Sorry but this is bullshit. I understood it the first time and now you suggest that it is justified to escape as long as you dont have a dictor within a minute to catch a logoffski.
I already catched it with my point, and only because a bubble autotriggers aggro at e-warp doesnt justify that this mechanic shouldnt work with a normal point.
My experience was just an example, and aslong as logging off shouldnt be a viable tactic to escape, i dont see why this should work on super's but not on smaller targets, only because you dont bring a blob within a minute.
Thats nonsense.
Also you would help this discussion if you would point out that good reasons you mentioned.
From a technical perspective - the only thing the server knows is that the connection to the client was lost, for whatever reason. The server does not know the reason. The player may have logged off. The player may have crahsed. Or the player may have logged off specifically to avoid getting killed by a gatecamp.
Of all dissconnects between server and client during a 24 hours period gamewide, how many disconnects do you think fall in the latter category? Exactly. Very very very few. And you are actually arguing that because you lost a gank, the mechanic should be made so the latter case couldnt happen. Frankly, I am speechless of the stupidity.
 |

Cambarus
Clearly Compensating The Dark Triad
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:24:00 -
[36] - Quote
Normally I'm all for changes that make eve riskier, because CCP has been trending towards making the game a bit too carebear-friendly for my liking. However, you also have to factor in that people disconnect from the server for reasons other than avoiding gatecamps.
If someone bouncing between safes, or sitting at one cloaked, DCs, do you think it fair that the people trying to find them get a free pass to kill them, despite not actually being able to while they were at their keyboards? Same goes for damn near any situation tbh, when someone disconnects you'd be given a 1 minute timer (MORE than enough to probe them down, pretty much anywhere) During which if you so much as look at them funny they're as good as dead.
Tell ya what, when CCP changes gates so that they send someone to a random spot in the solar system on the other side (rather than just 15km from the gate) you can have your timer reset from 1 minute  |

non judgement
Without Fear Flying Burning Ships Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:26:00 -
[37] - Quote
They didn't commit their ship to battle. They only jumped through. Simple as that. It's not easy to engage a ship after it logs off before you have a chance to see it. I can't usually get a lock on a ship once it has entered warp. So you managed to get a lock on it between the pilot logging off and the ship warping? That's too late. You should have got a point on him before he logged off. EVE doesn't give you many second chances but this is one of those few times they have that chance to save their ship. If they made a mistake like trying to get away while staying logged on, then you'd have them for sure. But they didn't make that mistake.
If the situation was reversed, wouldn't you like to be able to log off before the other person has a chance to get a lock on your ship? You might have had something really expensive on your ship and you'll think "oh well, thats what I get for flying around with expensive stuff and not making sure that it was safe on the other side" ? Or will you be on these forums saying "It's unfair that I had no way to save my expensive ship/cargo" ? |

Haulin Aussie
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:48:00 -
[38] - Quote
Whilst it's easy for everyone to say the orca doesn't commit to a fight by simply jumping, had he been pointed whilst half way through aligning before warping off he still would have gained agression, yet aligning to warp isn't a commitment to fight either.
I see what the op is saying, but I don't think it's really a big deal. if you were super uber you would have camped his wh till he logged back in.
You went for a gank, you missed, move on bro. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |