Ganking empty freighters = working as intended.

It's actually not a legitimate tactic. Pre-spawning CONCORD for your own defense is an actionable offense.

That indicates that CCP doesn't want to share sub numbers. Nothing more.

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.

Here it is:
http://nosygamer.blogspot.hu/2014/06/explaining-chribbas-famous-graph.html

I don't have a direct access to the data but people used to maths stuff will see the R-¦ gives a slightly negative trend...

So yes eve online is definitely losing accounts, and players, probably at a faster rate. And it's been the case for years. But i don't see how this is relevant to the topic. I'm just posting it to end this pointless digression.

Here it is:
http://nosygamer.blogspot.hu/2014/06/explaining-chribbas-famous-graph.html

I don't have a direct access to the data but people used to maths stuff will see the R-¦ gives a slightly negative trend...

So yes eve online is definitely losing accounts, and players, probably at a faster rate. And it's been the case for years. But i don't see how this is relevant to the topic. I'm just posting it to end this pointless digression.

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.

She did. Here. GM Grimmi, posting on 2008.07.10 at 17:18:00.

Is there really any actual intent there? Seems more like giving the freedom to act and letting whatever happens happen.

You do realize that posting GM communication and quoting a GM's forum post are different things, right?

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.

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."

How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

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 Cool

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?

Ah I see the misunderstanding; I was attempting to state that if you use an alt for committing illegal acts (illegal in the sense that CONCORD kicks your ass for it) and then recycle them as a method to avoid the repercussions, you are committing an exploit. It's the avoidance of these penalties that is the problem.

I hope this clarifies my earlier statement somewhat.

Our stance towards recycling "disposable alts" for purposes such as suicide ganking or summoning CONCORD for bodyguard duty is that it is an exploit, clear and simple. Using "disposable ships" is not seen as an exploit since all ships ARE disposable, when properly insured.

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.

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.

In the last 3 days I collected roughly 20 killmails of suicide gankers and i am actually enjoying it.

wtf is this actually about?

Just don't use disposable alts and noobships to spawn CONCORD then ...

Out of interest, in how many of those 20 cases did the gankers kill their target?

Why not?

The Gankbears do, and if the GMs are foolish enough to ban freighter pilots because they spawned CONCORD early with a noob alt then you can get anyone banned by shooting them with an Ibis and having 20 people send "spoliter broke up my gank" tear petitions.

Simply BRILLANT!

Why not?

The Gankbears do, and if the GMs are foolish enough to ban freighter pilots because they spawned CONCORD early with a noob alt then you can get anyone banned by shooting them with an Ibis and having 20 people send "spoliter broke up my gank" tear petitions.

Simply BRILLANT!

Just saw 1 getting ganked. I mostly intercepted them on gates when they came from reshipping and jumping around systems, so actually caught them before they could get to a target. I also use one char to push them through gates when they bounce between gates whithin a system and then catch them with another char on the other side.

See, to me that's not anti ganking so much as just gatecamping flashies. But hey, kills are kills.

So stop the whining, grab a ship and go out to hunt them. If you want high sec to be safer, grab a ship and do what you can to make it happen.

First, many of the folks who are playing the mining/shipping side of the game instead of the PvP game aren't particularly interested in the PvP side of the game. Arguments like "Go get a ship and blow them up" or "why don't they all stop hiding in the station and kill the gankers" are problematic in that they're forcing gameplay choices on the miners/shippers.

If it's unacceptable to force gameplay choices on gankers, it's just as unacceptable to force gameplay choices on the miners/shippers.[quote]

As I pointed out above, you made a huge error in saying that miners are being "forced" to do anything. They are being made to face the consequences of their actions, but those are different things.


[quote]
Second, it's often not practical to switch to different gameplay. Part of the reason I'm doing the mining/manufacturing thing because I now have young kids. The 9 month old doesn't respond well to "Just a sec, I'm hunting down this ganker". And it's difficult to pause a PvP battle with "Hang on a sec, kid's crying". However, rocks don't give a **** if I go make a bottle.

'Couple issues with this.

First, many of the folks who are playing the mining/shipping side of the game instead of the PvP game aren't particularly interested in the PvP side of the game. Arguments like "Go get a ship and blow them up" or "why don't they all stop hiding in the station and kill the gankers" are problematic in that they're forcing gameplay choices on the miners/shippers. If it's unacceptable to force gameplay choices on gankers, it's just as unacceptable to force gameplay choices on the miners/shippers.

Just stick with arguing the game rules allow it, and the miner/shipper has tools to avoid it.

Second, it's often not practical to switch to different gameplay. Part of the reason I'm doing the mining/manufacturing thing because I now have young kids. The 9 month old doesn't respond well to "Just a sec, I'm hunting down this ganker". And it's difficult to pause a PvP battle with "Hang on a sec, kid's crying". However, rocks don't give a **** if I go make a bottle.

Yes, it means I risk getting ganked. In fact, they recently got me while the 2-year-old wanted some attention. But there's few other interesting ways to play with such real-life limitations. So I try to minimize the exposure, and get enough to rebuild my losses.

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

There's space for us all in New Eden.