| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
42
   |
Posted - 2014.06.19 11:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Don't remember Concord Summoning being declared an exploit by CCP. Anyone have the link to it being announced?
Pics or it didn't happen seems to apply here. The fact that a good many were banned for doing it tells us its true.
If they didn't biomass the char which was used to summon CONCORD, they should have petitioned the ban because it was unjustified. Summoning CONCORD in itself is perfectly legal, no matter if the ganker does it or the miner. The only thing that is not allowed is biomassing the char with a negative security status to avoid the consequences.
Here is the official position of CCP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4572979#post4572979
I'd welcome if CCP would put this in a more visible place, as gankers love to spread the misinformation that it isn't allowed. |
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
42
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 12:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sarah Flynt wrote:baltec1 wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Don't remember Concord Summoning being declared an exploit by CCP. Anyone have the link to it being announced?
Pics or it didn't happen seems to apply here. The fact that a good many were banned for doing it tells us its true. If they didn't biomass the char which was used to summon CONCORD, they should have petitioned the ban because it was unjustified. Summoning CONCORD in itself is perfectly legal, no matter if the ganker does it or the miner. The only thing that is not allowed is biomassing the char with a negative security status to avoid the consequences. Here is the official position of CCP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4572979#post4572979I'd welcome if CCP would put this in a more visible place, as gankers love to spread the misinformation that it isn't allowed. At no point do either CCP or GMs say that summoning concord for protection is legal. Bot are simply stating that recycling alts to avoid sec loss is bannable.
Sigh. Then please read through the whole thread where these posts originate from. It's linked in the post that I linked to and deals exactly with this question: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=818978
CCP Atropos wrote:Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes
It doesn't get much clearer than that. |
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
42
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 12:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Quote:
It doesn't get much clearer than that.
Yet players were banned for doing it and we were told via GMs that spawning concord to protect yourself is not an intended use of concord. Concord is a punishment, not a merc group you call on to protect yourself from other players. Godmode npcs are not there to do the job of players.
If they did biomass their CONCORD calling char afterwards without facing the consequences of the negative sec status, these bans were justified. If they didn't, they should have petitioned the ban as it was NOT justified.
I don't doubt what you're saying, but the word from Lead Game Master Grimmi carries much more weight than a ruling from a GM further down the foodchain.
Nonetheless I'd welcome an up-to-date official statement from CCP, that can be easily found and linked to, that once and for all puts an end to the rumour mongering. |
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
42
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 12:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:So... its a legitimate tactic to bring a NPC corp alt in an ibis along with your freighter and a guy in a frigate in your corp, and every jump, kill the alt, summon concord and then jump, reship and repeat at each jump?
That just doesnt sound right to me
It is a legitimate tactic if you don't biomass that alt without getting his sec status up again. But it won't help you much as the one CONCORD spawn will only deal with one of the many gank ships. You'd have to bring more at once, depending on the size of the gank fleet.
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
43
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 20:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Sarah Flynt wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:So... its a legitimate tactic to bring a NPC corp alt in an ibis along with your freighter and a guy in a frigate in your corp, and every jump, kill the alt, summon concord and then jump, reship and repeat at each jump?
That just doesnt sound right to me It is a legitimate tactic if you don't biomass that alt without getting his sec status up again. But it won't help you much as the one CONCORD spawn will only deal with one of the many gank ships. You'd have to bring more at once, depending on the size of the gank fleet. It's actually not a legitimate tactic. Pre-spawning CONCORD for your own defense is an actionable offense.
I've quoted several CCP Dev/GM statements in earlier posts in this thread which illustrate under which circumstances it is a valid tactic. If you can show me a single official and more recent statement that overrules them, I'm all ears.
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
46
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 20:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Sarah Flynt wrote: I've quoted several CCP Dev/GM statements in earlier posts in this thread which illustrate under which circumstances it is a valid tactic. If you can show me a single official and more recent statement that overrules them, I'm all ears.
Nice try, but I caught you out. You damn sure did not post GM communication. Nevermind that it's against the rules to do so, probably against the rules to claim you did so too. Got anything better, or are you just going to make spurious claims based on a poor interpretation of a dev post? Because we already have a guy on the forum who does that, and Dinsdale guards his title fiercely.
At least you got one thing right: I never posted private GM communication. All DEV/GM quotes were taken from this thread on the official forums: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=818978
I suggest you read it to its full extend in order to also get the context of each CCP response.
Until you can come up with something substantial (e.g. public and verifiable quotes from official CCP people) that overrule CCP's responses in the above thread, I don't see any ground for further discussion with you about this topic.
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources
46
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 21:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
Morihei Akachi wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:You do realize that posting GM communication and quoting a GM's forum post are different things, right? Heh GǪ fair enough. Although if that's a distinction you're going to insist on, you'll have to admit that you were wrong to accuse Sarah of claiming to have posted "communication"; she speaks only of "statements."
baltec1 was talking about private GM communication earlier but didn't quote it for obvious reasons. |
| |
|