Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: [one page] |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |

Duchess Amarrian
Astro Technologies Apocalypse Now.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
|

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
5796
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
. -á<- Argue this, not this ->-á( -í-¦ -£-û -í-¦) |

Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
654
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Gettin in early on this one.
. They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake. |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4285
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ha! =][= |

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4483
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
You were flying a Prorator and you were not cloaked up despite hauling a contract with massive collateral.
Seriously, if you have a load like this, fly your ship like everyone is out to get you because probably that is actually the case. You had the ship to do so and still you failed. CCP already gave you everything you needed to protect yourself and you did not apply the cloak. Thus: POP! Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9178
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
I would LOVE to know how you managed to die in a Prorator.
I am guessing you were afk.
Oh, and as for you hearing that CCP will "put a stop to this", citation needed. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2531
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:51:00 -
[7] - Quote
All those low-slots you have ARE NOT for expanded cargohold II ... One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

Milan Nantucket
New Eden Misfits
150
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
When you dont have defensive stuff in your fit what do you expect. Drop two of the carohold expanders and put n a dc2 and a bulkhead2
Then again you already knew that and chose not to bother. |

Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
374
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Oh lol. BTW you got shot at by a tornado which sports battleship grade weapons on a battlecruiser hull. Still your loses are small time so stop crying. Also bounties are useless really. I keep putting bounties on myself just to be a 133337 pilot. |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6591
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Without going into the details, its hard to know what the "it" or "this" you want to stop is.
Do you mean being shot at? "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9178
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:57:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Without going into the details, its hard to know what the "it" or "this" you want to stop is.
Do you mean being shot at?
#PvPSlider "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Derrick Miles
EVENumbers
4078
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
Welcome to the Yin and Yang of Eve, where those that seek to live a peaceful existence are nevertheless in constant conflict with those that seek their death and destruction. |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2533
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote:Oh lol. BTW you got shot at by a tornado which sports battleship grade weapons on a battlecruiser hull. Still your loses are small time so stop crying. Also bounties are useless really. I keep putting bounties on myself just to be a 133337 pilot.
Speaking of which ... someone cleared mine a while back ... I should go find someone to bounty me again. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4484
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 11:58:00 -
[14] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:All those low-slots you have ARE NOT for expanded cargohold II ...
Milan Nantucket wrote:When you dont have defensive stuff in your fit what do you expect. Drop two of the carohold expanders and put n a dc2 and a bulkhead2
Then again you already knew that and chose not to bother. You seriously propose a *tank* on a *Prorator*? You've never flown a Blockade Runner, did you? Your tank is your cloak. Never getting locked is the only thing that will save you. Putting bulkheads in there that will make you get caught more easily is the exact opposite of saving your ass. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |

True Sight
Deep Freeze Industries
191
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:00:00 -
[15] - Quote
1) If a courier contract looks too good to be true - it almost certainly is. If you accepted some contract to move something small through safe space and being offered many millions to do it then something is up.
2) If you were suspecting something bad, you should have first created an insta-warp out of the station you picked the package up from, in order to guarantee you could safely warp out when undocking
3) You could have considered using a better tanked ship, such as a heavy transport (with the right modules) to reduce the possibility of suicide ganking
4) You could have accepted the courier contract on a different character, or hauled it on a different character, which is generally a smart move when accepting public courier contracts even when they don't look too good to be true.
Finally, you are wrong, CCP have never stated they're going to do anything/change this, this is part of eve, you just got scammed by someone for quite probably getting way too greedy and now you're hear complaining rather than accepting your own responsibility. There is 50 different ways this could have gone entirely differently. |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1557
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:00:00 -
[16] - Quote
Why should CCP hold your hand and protect you? CONCORD, which is OP, already patrols HiSec to serve as a deterrent, exacting absolute vengeance on criminals. Note that it's "HiSec", not "MaxSec" - there is no absolute security in EVE. You consent to PvP each time you undock. Do not fly what you can't afford to lose and consider every ship you undock to already be dead.
That said there are many steps you can take. The first step is setting up an "instadock". The 2nd step is specific to the ship you were in - L2CLOAK. Epic Space Cat |

Zero Sum Gain
FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOM Silent Requiem
97
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
It's unusual for the trap to be at the delivering station, as you could chance to warp into docking range or have made a docking bookmark (which I suggest you do in the future). How close to station were you when you left warp? |

Prince Kobol
2084
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
Give the gankers some credit.
First they found somebody stupid enough to fall for their courier contract. Then they waited just before you docked as that is when you are most vulnerable .
You see you can make insta undocks, you can warp whilst cloaked, you can make afe spots until they come out of your ass but you can not do anything to make the docking process quicker.
Once you land on station, you will de-cloak and your barely moving.. basically a sitting duck. The gankers basically have a few seconds to make you go boom and that is all they need.
Not going to say anything else as True Sight has covered it
Well played to them  |

Horus H'kaan
Grand Theft Enyo
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:07:00 -
[19] - Quote
HTFU I'm in your mission, stealin' your loots. |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2533
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:10:00 -
[20] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Velicitia wrote:All those low-slots you have ARE NOT for expanded cargohold II ... Milan Nantucket wrote:When you dont have defensive stuff in your fit what do you expect. Drop two of the carohold expanders and put n a dc2 and a bulkhead2
Then again you already knew that and chose not to bother. You seriously propose a *tank* on a *Prorator*? You've never flown a Blockade Runner, did you? Your tank is your cloak. Never getting locked is the only thing that will save you. Putting bulkheads in there that will make you get caught more easily is the exact opposite of saving your ass.
Always get the Amarrian ones backwards ... although, if you're "one second from being docked" as the OP was, a cloak isn't gonna exactly work. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
1320
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:10:00 -
[21] - Quote
You must be pretty naive to pay so much collateral....what did you expect?? According to the comment here ... http://tinyurl.com/ozzgzpj TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a di++k joke."-áRobin Williams - RIP
|

Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
374
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:11:00 -
[22] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote:It's unusual for the trap to be at the delivering station, as you could chance to warp into docking range or have made a docking bookmark (which I suggest you do in the future). How close to station were you when you left warp?
Unless of course... She AP'd the prorator. |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2533
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:11:00 -
[23] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:You see you can make insta undocks, you can warp whilst cloaked, you can make afe spots until they come out of your ass but you can not do anything to make the docking process quicker.
Proper "WTZ" bookmarks on the station.
They (generall) also make really good cyno spots in low. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

True Sight
Deep Freeze Industries
192
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:11:00 -
[24] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Give the gankers some credit. First they found somebody stupid enough to fall for their courier contract. Then they waited just before you docked as that is when you are most vulnerable . You see you can make insta undocks, you can warp whilst cloaked, you can make afe spots until they come out of your ass but you can not do anything to make the docking process quicker. Once you land on station, you will de-cloak and your barely moving.. basically a sitting duck. The gankers basically have a few seconds to make you go boom and that is all they need. Not going to say anything else as True Sight has covered it Well played to them 
Extra credit as they probably picked a station that is notorious for docking range too...
- Yup, dead-end system down quite a pipe so they knew you were coming - Yup, 4 stations in Ono with horrible docks/undocks :)
Good job them! |

Vortexo VonBrenner
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
1506
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:12:00 -
[25] - Quote
So...a battleship locked and alpha you in the time between when your covops cloak deactivated and you docked in station? Huh. That sucks. CCP doesn't need to do anything, sorry. Bounties don't really mean much...again, sorry.
I'm listening to-áBj+¦rk, playing EVE, eating fishsticks, and I'm cold....this is immersion gaming. |

Zero Sum Gain
FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOM Silent Requiem
97
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:12:00 -
[26] - Quote
/delete wrong thread |

Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
358
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:14:00 -
[27] - Quote
*Jedi mind trick* "This is not the game you are looking for." *waves hand*
Either the rules apply to everyone, or they don't justly apply to anyone.
|

Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
296
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:18:00 -
[28] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
You're an embarrasment to your alliance. Stop moaning. Don't Panic.
|

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
406
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:38:00 -
[29] - Quote
No no no. Don't stop moaning yet. I'm not quite there... |

Phugoid
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
169
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 12:52:00 -
[30] - Quote
Duchess......
First off, CCP (concord) does not protect. It only punishes in hi-sec. You are responsible for your protection in this game. Which means a combination of experience, wits, skills, luck, fittings, etc etc. Which all takes some time to learn.
Now, I will be kind, because I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are new. But this game is not for the feint hearted. You need to learn and adapt from whatever happens in this game, if you don't, you will just end up being tears.
Its a guarantee that ship/isks losses will occur to you in this game. So instead of whining about it, smarten up, learn how to avoid or at least lessen your chances of ganks. I too was a noob, but I learned and adapted to the game, and have made billions since. And none of it from pvp :P
Hopefully you will learn and adapt. otherwise you will eventually rage quit :)
o7 Flugzeugf++hrer |

Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
162
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:22:00 -
[31] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
Learn how to play the game FFS
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7804
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:27:00 -
[32] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:No no no. Don't stop moaning yet. I'm not quite there...
Damn it, my monitor now has coffee on it.
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7804
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
This forum has DEV and GM tags when those people post. Can we get a "this guy is playing the wrong game" tag for easier navigation as well? That way we know what posts to not read.
|

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6609
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:32:00 -
[34] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
Learn how to play the game FFS
This is in competition for replacing my signature, I hope you realise. "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
109
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
For the record, the lesson you should have learned is not "run to forum and complain". |

Wacktopia
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
675
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:49:00 -
[36] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high.......I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this......
They already did. Welcome to EVE and the meta game.
How about this; create some insta-undocks - problem solved.
EVE is about ongoing adapting and problem-solving. Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together - -áFleet-Up.com |

Erika Tsurpalen
SoulFire Gaming
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:51:00 -
[37] - Quote
Learn how to defend yourself and it wont happen again. Actually it probably will.
If you want to play even thats something you have to live with |

Grimpak
Shifting Sands Trader Cartel Bleak Horizon Alliance.
2327
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 13:52:00 -
[38] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this.
wait, you heard this from CCP, or the whiners like you?
also, this belongs in C&P.
[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1051
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:03:00 -
[39] - Quote
Eugene Kerner wrote:http://tinyurl.com/ozzgzpj 7 billion? Please be true Kreygasm.
@OP, the only people who have the edge in this game are the smarter players. [witty image] - Stream |

Misunderstood Genius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
87
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:07:00 -
[40] - Quote
You can get around this with - an insta-undock off-grid (especially in the major trading hub systems) - using a cloaky Blockade Runner
What EVE makes great is the fact that you must fail (several) times to see this as a chance to learn and adapt. I am running an hauler alt for ages and lost two times my ship - autopilot in hi-sec - no insta-undock in Jita
Some day I might lose the third one. Who knows? But believe me: there will be no post about it  |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20419
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:13:00 -
[41] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:High Sec Hauling/Mining Kills - TY CCP for No Protection Highsec doesn't provide protection, that is your responsibility, it provides punishment; both for the gankers, and the feckless.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
8567
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:18:00 -
[42] - Quote
Woah Jonah.. new avatar 
~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6619
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:18:00 -
[43] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote: the feckless.
I need all my feck
In fact, it could be said
I don't have a single feck to give "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Sequester Risalo
Significant Others
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:19:00 -
[44] - Quote
Misunderstood Genius wrote:You can get around this with - an insta-undock off-grid (especially in the major trading hub systems) - using a cloaky Blockade Runner
If you (and some others) had bothered to actually read the thread before posting your valued opinion, you would have noticed that the lady did in fact fly a blockade runner and was in the process of docking when the incident happened. Please explain how insta-undocking would have helped in that situation.
Thank you |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2560
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:23:00 -
[45] - Quote
Sequester Risalo wrote:Misunderstood Genius wrote:You can get around this with - an insta-undock off-grid (especially in the major trading hub systems) - using a cloaky Blockade Runner
If you (and some others) had bothered to actually read the thread before posting your valued opinion, you would have noticed that the lady did in fact fly a blockade runner and was in the process of docking when the incident happened. Please explain how insta-undocking would have helped in that situation. Thank you
wouldn't ... but better WTZ bookmarks on the station would have ... One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
8567
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:23:00 -
[46] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
You're a hauler and you don't have a warp to 0 BM pre-scouted on your target station?
The BM creation takes less than a minute for an alt in a rookie ship.
For shame. ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Vyl Vit
695
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:29:00 -
[47] - Quote
Now you've done it. You've pinched the ganker's central nerve. They operate on a single nerve system with a four synapse neural pathway, then insist their knowledge is the only knowledge that exists. You'll get no more reason as a response to your post than you got with the contractual system.
By now I guess you found the "too good to be true" contract, which permeates the game. There's so many of them it's hard to find a legitimate delivery contract, and anyone wishing to create one of those has to deal with the fact they're pissing into an ocean of scams, and have a very long wait ahead of them.
Contracts with one jump into low sec (0.4 or below) are designed to lure the hauler into a trap, kill the freighter, and invalidate the contract so the hauler loses the deposit money. If you haul don't accept contracts with one stop in low sec. That gate is where the trap will be. (I'm not sure what the circumstance was for the OP's ambush as that wasn't made abundantly clear.)
However, what is being said about high sec is quite an honest reaction. So vilification of the OP for it can only be done by those who like to do this sort of thing - our beloved gankers (read: low attention span, low intelligence, no insight, no way to make long-term plans or arrangements.)
We have clamored for CCP to make such acts of vandalism in high sec costly to the offender, to no avail. It's as though they think the majority of players do this sort of thing, which is insulting to the player base, but there's no way anyone can stop CCP staff from forming idiotic and ill-conceived opinions.
The best you can do is contort yourself to accommodate this endorsed sociopathy which makes a joke of "sovereignty" as a concept. One wonders why CCP wastes bandwidth putting that word on everything, when it means nothing here. It reminds me of LOTRO putting "cow" over every cow. Like...uh...no one can tell that's a cow. Then getting lag due to all the data....you see what I mean.
The interesting part is reading the "logical" rationalizations and justifications the sufferers of this mental disorder, and their co-dependents try to use. While they do this they try to seem SO very intelligent. Reminds me of watching a monkey play with a wad of bubble gum I threw him at the Birmingham Zoo. He was occupied with that for two hours - grape. Anyone with any sense has already left town. |

TheButcherPete
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
481
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:34:00 -
[48] - Quote
Haven't you learned anything from Red Frog's example? NEVER haul with the character you accepted the contract with.
btw the collateral the OP had to pay was like 7b, apparently. THE KING OF EVE RADIO
If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs? |

RomeStar
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
511
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:34:00 -
[49] - Quote
The tears are strong in this one. Signatured removed, CCP Phantom |

Victor Andall
734
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:38:00 -
[50] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote: The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract.
Sounds to me like you already know whose fault it was. I just undocked for the first time and someone challenged me to a duel. Wat do?
19.08.2014 - Dinsdale gets slammed by CCP Falcon. Never forget. |

BuckStrider
Nano-Tech Experiments
414
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:40:00 -
[51] - Quote
Congratulations Duchess Amarrian!!!!!
The first prize you have 'won' is having your rant featured on DJ Auger's 'Rage Quit Theatre' (Eve Radio), as I can't see him passing this one up.
The second prize (and most important) you have 'won' is a killmail in your name via The Devil's Warrior Alliance 'Killing It Forward' program!
That's right Duchess Amarrian, some poor carebear is going to 'thank you' for being ganked. Mine smart. Mine safe. Purchase your mining permit today...... www.minerbumping.com |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6622
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:42:00 -
[52] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote: You'll get no more reason as a response to your post than you got with the contractual system.
Especially when she refuses to give any idea of the details of what actualyl happened
Vyl Vit wrote:By now I guess you found the "too good to be true" contract, which permeates the game. You guess? As opposed to the the fact the OP is about such a contract
Vyl Vit wrote: (I'm not sure what the circumstance was for the OP's ambush as that wasn't made abundantly clear.) But you already know she didn't deserve it and her attackers must be "sociopaths" and sufferers of "mental disorders"
Vyl Vit wrote:The interesting part is reading the "logical" rationalizations and justifications the sufferers of this mental disorder, and their co-dependents try to use. While they do this they try to seem SO very intelligent. Reminds me of watching a monkey play with a wad of bubble gum I threw him at the Birmingham Zoo. He was occupied with that for two hours - grape.
Where's simply insulting people because you don't like them is such a sign of high-intent and sensible logical thought.
Go you, I'm sure you are a credit to your creed. "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20421
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:50:00 -
[53] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Woah Jonah.. new avatar  My hobby of slaverhound training resulted in the loss of an arm, and blood all over my Quafe t-shirt.
So new vest, and an arm; notice the red stripes, I can now shitpost 22% faster than I could with an arm made of meat.
Same facial expression though, because my fedo just crapped on the sofa, luckily I'm currently docked in an Amarr station 
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RomeStar
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
514
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:51:00 -
[54] - Quote
Hyperspatial Rigs WTF I don't even know what to say about this. Signatured removed, CCP Phantom |

Charax Bouclier
Emerald Drama Theatrics
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 14:55:00 -
[55] - Quote
It looks like the thread generated some learning tips for the OP so it's not a total loss. Factor this in as a cost of doing business. |

Neckbeard Nolyfe
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:05:00 -
[56] - Quote
xd1 xd2 xd3 xd4
|

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:08:00 -
[57] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote: However, what is being said about high sec is quite an honest reaction. So vilification of the OP for it can only be done by those who like to do this sort of thing - our beloved gankers (read: low attention span, low intelligence, no insight, no way to make long-term plans or arrangements.)
*puts down popcorn* http://i.imgur.com/0Ox7Jet.jpg
Ur post amuses me; as do a lot of others in this thread. You're so far off the truth its actually creating tears of laughter.
Anyways, i'm happy to help you guys learn a few new things; see me as an educator, not a ganking e-bully. For i spread wisdom throughout eve at a small cost; in this case 7.09 billion worth of collateral. (lol)
Again, thanks allot duchess for using my service. happy hunting o7 |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7810
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:09:00 -
[58] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:Now you've done it. You've pinched the ganker's central nerve. They operate on a single nerve system with a four synapse neural pathway, then insist their knowledge is the only knowledge that exists. You'll get no more reason as a response to your post than you got with the contractual system.
By now I guess you found the "too good to be true" contract, which permeates the game. There's so many of them it's hard to find a legitimate delivery contract, and anyone wishing to create one of those has to deal with the fact they're pissing into an ocean of scams, and have a very long wait ahead of them.
Contracts with one jump into low sec (0.4 or below) are designed to lure the hauler into a trap, kill the freighter, and invalidate the contract so the hauler loses the deposit money. If you haul don't accept contracts with one stop in low sec. That gate is where the trap will be. (I'm not sure what the circumstance was for the OP's ambush as that wasn't made abundantly clear.)
However, what is being said about high sec is quite an honest reaction. So vilification of the OP for it can only be done by those who like to do this sort of thing - our beloved gankers (read: low attention span, low intelligence, no insight, no way to make long-term plans or arrangements.)
We have clamored for CCP to make such acts of vandalism in high sec costly to the offender, to no avail. It's as though they think the majority of players do this sort of thing, which is insulting to the player base, but there's no way anyone can stop CCP staff from forming idiotic and ill-conceived opinions.
The best you can do is contort yourself to accommodate this endorsed sociopathy which makes a joke of "sovereignty" as a concept. One wonders why CCP wastes bandwidth putting that word on everything, when it means nothing here. It reminds me of LOTRO putting "cow" over every cow. Like...uh...no one can tell that's a cow. Then getting lag due to all the data....you see what I mean.
The interesting part is reading the "logical" rationalizations and justifications the sufferers of this mental disorder, and their co-dependents try to use. While they do this they try to seem SO very intelligent. Reminds me of watching a monkey play with a wad of bubble gum I threw him at the Birmingham Zoo. He was occupied with that for two hours - grape.
Ohm that got a chuckle out of me.
Isn't it funny when a poster types something like, thinking they are being snarky and cool when in reality all he's doing is proving how weak minded and unrealistic he is.
The replies the OP is getting isn't all from gankers (I'm not), it's from people who understand what EVE is and what it requires. patience, good sense, RESPONSIBILITY for one's self and one's own enjoyment, and the understanding that a multiplayer game is like real life in that it shows that the world doesn't revolve around any one person.
The OP (and apparently Vyl Vit) thinks it's someone Else's job to protect them against the moves (and scams) of other players. Sorry, but that's your job, no one elses. If you don't like a game about independence and freedom (for ALL players), i'ts only your fault for choosing to play it.
|

Natural CloneKiller
Ukranian Hauling Co.
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:11:00 -
[59] - Quote
Pure Gold...
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7810
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:15:00 -
[60] - Quote
Natural CloneKiller wrote:Pure Gold...
Good kill Mr. Clonekiller sir. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20423
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:20:00 -
[61] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:However, what is being said about high sec is quite an honest reaction. So vilification of the OP for it can only be done by those who like to do this sort of thing - our beloved gankers (read: low attention span, low intelligence, no insight, no way to make long-term plans or arrangements.) Nope, like Jenn I'm not a ganker, I mission, I mine, I trade etcetera, in short I'm what many would call a bear.
I am however a realist, one that appreciates that I am playing a PvP game, and takes steps to mitigate the chances of becoming a victim; that is the difference between a carebear and a bear.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

CompleteFailure
DAWGS Corp.
195
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:26:00 -
[62] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/yu13SMh.gif |

BoBoZoBo
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
468
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:27:00 -
[63] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
In fact, it is the whole point of the game. OP did not read patch notes.
OP - When did CCP say they were going to protect you? Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7815
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:37:00 -
[64] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Vyl Vit wrote:However, what is being said about high sec is quite an honest reaction. So vilification of the OP for it can only be done by those who like to do this sort of thing - our beloved gankers (read: low attention span, low intelligence, no insight, no way to make long-term plans or arrangements.) Nope, like Jenn I'm not a ganker, I mission, I mine, I trade etcetera, in short I'm what many would call a bear. I am however a realist, one that appreciates that I am playing a PvP game, and takes steps to mitigate the chances of becoming a victim; that is the difference between a carebear and a bear.
That's why I say there are 2 kinds of 'bear (3 if you count the hairy man-loving types, but lets go with 2 for right now).
The pvp-Sandbox 'bear is the guy who likes PVE but understands that he's playing an open world PVP game and thus is a target for people who want to pvp (whether the 'bear wants to or not). The sandbox bear (SandBear? off to the copyright office I go) LOVES this and measures his playing ability by how much he is able to carebear WHILE thwarting the evil machinations of the dastardly PVP freak.
It's like being a Gazelle that finds a pride of Lions and starts twerking in front of them while singing 'can't touch this' (or maybe, 'can't eat this') then runs away.
Then there's "themepark bear", the guy who, after a long day of flipping burgers or some other menial job, comes home and wants nothing more than to kick back and feel like a hero because he can kill some wild boars in Azeroth or fly his mining ship in EVe and give those evil rocks (who he imagines all look like his boss) a right good rogering.
The IDEA that someone can come and remind him that he is indeed a loser is so galling that he must take action, that action being 'run to forums and complain' but somehow not 'stop giving 15 dollars a month to sandbox pvp gankfest game makers'. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
411
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:45:00 -
[65] - Quote
One of these things is worthy of respect. One of these things is not. Seriously, not trolling here. I used to be like Jenn and Jonah, then I was lured to the darkside by promises of cookies. I still haven't gotten any cookies, but I've had a great deal of fun. I consider myself a bear in recovery, only by bathing myself in the blood of my own kind can I achieve a higher state... Even before I learned which end of the blaster meant business, however, threads like this gave me facepalm induced migraines. A fundamental misunderstanding of what EVE means is at work here, and it's something that needs to be quashed. |

Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4269
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:47:00 -
[66] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
First of all, welcome to EVE. No, CCP is not doing anything about anything that is entirely within your own power to do something about. What you experienced was EVE working as intended. It's up to you to learn from it and mitigate the odds of it happening again. Anything else is your own failure. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |

Paranoid Loyd
1596
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:52:00 -
[67] - Quote
LOL, 7 Bil "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:53:00 -
[68] - Quote
Having a 7.1bil kill is nice, but all this drama is so much better than a bit of isk  |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20425
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:54:00 -
[69] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: It's like being a Gazelle that finds a pride of Lions and starts twerking in front of them while singing 'can't touch this' (or maybe, 'can't eat this') then runs away. 
Quote: a right good rogering. We'll make a Briton of you yet. Resistance is futile, you will be reassimilated into what's left of the British Empire...
 
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4269
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 15:59:00 -
[70] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:...British Empire...
For those that don't know, this is what is meant by a contradiction in terms.
 GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |

Misunderstood Genius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
87
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:07:00 -
[71] - Quote
Sequester Risalo wrote:Misunderstood Genius wrote:You can get around this with - an insta-undock off-grid (especially in the major trading hub systems) - using a cloaky Blockade Runner
If you (and some others) had bothered to actually read the thread before posting your valued opinion, you would have noticed that the lady did in fact fly a blockade runner and was in the process of docking when the incident happened. Please explain how insta-undocking would have helped in that situation. Thank you
Thanks for the hint. I missed that.
- a bookmark at undock or backside of the station at 0
The insta-undock hint will help next time not to get alpha'd when undocking and aligning.
|

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20428
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:09:00 -
[72] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:...British Empire... For those that don't know, this is what is meant by a contradiction in terms.  Otherwise known as an oxymoron 
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Mythrandier
Corporate Scum Cult of War
452
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:19:00 -
[73] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
I am however a realist, one that appreciates that I am playing a PvP game, and takes steps to mitigate the chances of becoming a victim; that is the difference between a carebear and a bear.
Never (or at least not often enough) have more accurate words been uttered in GD.
If more of highsec thought like you sir, we wouldnt see as many terrible posts as the op.
Ps. Love the new avatar Jonah. "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." --á D. Adams. |

Boom McCondor
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:20:00 -
[74] - Quote
The fun will come weeks later when you have a properly fitted ship and you manage to slide right by that guy who ganked you. Happened to me last night on an alt, and the ganker is actually one of the posters in this thread  |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20430
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:21:00 -
[75] - Quote
Mythrandier wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
I am however a realist, one that appreciates that I am playing a PvP game, and takes steps to mitigate the chances of becoming a victim; that is the difference between a carebear and a bear.
Never (or at least not often enough) have more accurate words been uttered in GD. If more of highsec thought like you sir, we wouldnt see as many terrible posts as the op. I like carebears, they make me look good 
Quote:Ps. Love the new avatar Jonah. TY
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Paranoid Loyd
1598
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:22:00 -
[76] - Quote
Oh, I saw you  "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Boom McCondor
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:23:00 -
[77] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Boom McCondor wrote:The fun will come weeks later when you have a properly fitted ship and you manage to slide right by that guy who ganked you. Happened to me last night on an alt, and the ganker is actually one of the posters in this thread  I saw you, just wasn't prepared  Can you lock that fast? That ship was in warp before it even uncloaked! |

Paranoid Loyd
1598
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:24:00 -
[78] - Quote
Boom McCondor wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Boom McCondor wrote:The fun will come weeks later when you have a properly fitted ship and you manage to slide right by that guy who ganked you. Happened to me last night on an alt, and the ganker is actually one of the posters in this thread  I saw you, just wasn't prepared  Can you lock that fast? That ship was in warp before it even uncloaked! Depends, probably not though. Nice to see you adapted. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20430
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:26:00 -
[79] - Quote
Boom McCondor wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Boom McCondor wrote:The fun will come weeks later when you have a properly fitted ship and you manage to slide right by that guy who ganked you. Happened to me last night on an alt, and the ganker is actually one of the posters in this thread  I saw you, just wasn't prepared  Can you lock that fast? That ship was in warp before it even uncloaked! The moment you moved you appeared on the overview, regardless of what you see on the screen.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Boom McCondor
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:27:00 -
[80] - Quote
I don't carry anything SUPER expensive, and Avoid the Loyd is kind of a fun game.
EDIT: Thanks Jonah. I never really knew exactly when you could be seen. Not really something I paid attention to. |

Elusive Panda
Gendry's Leech Nerfed Alliance Go Away
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:29:00 -
[81] - Quote
An instant dock bookmark or even just a tactical off the station to scout would have saved your ship and your cargo.
Now, remind me why CCP should protect you when there were clear and easy step to shield yourself? |

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4497
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:37:00 -
[82] - Quote
Seven billion collateral. And it wasn't even paid good. The fail started at the accept button. From Jita no less. This smells more like money laundering. Like those noob-ships full of PLEXes. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |

Immortal Chrono Pimpin
Quenchless Bloodlust
107
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:44:00 -
[83] - Quote
"I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this."
That is very interesting can you verify this op? |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2864
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:48:00 -
[84] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
When you hit the "dock" button, the game is supposed to warp you into docking range of the station and dock you, without any chance for you to be caught. But there is a bug: Sometimes the game warps you too far away from the station to dock immediately, and you are vulnerable for several seconds. I have heard that this can be petitioned, and you may get your ship back. BUT you will not get any dropped loot back. (That has always been true for any ship loss due to a bug or exploit.)
One way to get around this bug is to make a bookmark as close to the station as you can. When you warp to that bookmark you will always be in docking range and can dock quickly.
Another trick is to place a bookmark well away from the station, but in an odd direction. A direction where there are no stargates. The gankers tend to collect in the area where ships drop out of warp, so their short range, high damage weapons will do a fast kill before CONCORD shows. If you come to the station from an odd direction, they will all be out of range.
So until CCP fixes this bug, everyone should make a "Dogleg" bookmark and a "Quick dock" bookmark at every station they frequent. Make alot of them, copy them, share them. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |

Jur Tissant
Unreal Darkness
190
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 16:50:00 -
[85] - Quote
CCP already has taken care of this issue in the form of tanking modules and cloaking devices. Seriously, how do you get blown up in high-sec when your ship has a covops cloak?
Still, hopefully you will prepare for this possibility in the future so it isn't all too bad. |

Phugoid
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:00:00 -
[86] - Quote
wait a minute....ur toon is old enough to afford a 7 bil coll? and you are crying about not being protected?
I take back my sympathies! Flugzeugf++hrer |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24109
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:12:00 -
[87] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:When you hit the "dock" button, the game is supposed to warp you into docking range of the station and dock you, without any chance for you to be caught. No, it's not. It's simply supposed to warp you to the station, and then dock. Warping works as normal, docking works as normal, being caught in-between the two works as normal. If your warp lands you within <2,500 of the docking radius, that is workings as normal too because that's how wtz always works.
Quote:But there is a bug: Sometimes the game warps you too far away from the station to dock immediately, and you are vulnerable for several seconds. That is not a bug, but standard warp behaviour. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
808
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:27:00 -
[88] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:...organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. Are you telling us here, that you didn't protect your hauler by accepting the contract with an alt? Remove insurance. |

Grim Hood
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
132
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:33:00 -
[89] - Quote
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BMNG2h4CQAI2dtY.jpg Grim Progression - Watch me get kersploded!
|

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2864
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:46:00 -
[90] - Quote
Jur Tissant wrote:CCP already has taken care of this issue in the form of tanking modules and cloaking devices. Seriously, how do you get blown up in high-sec when your ship has a covops cloak?
Ive had it happen. You uncloak when you are dumped 800 meters off the station. Before your ship moves that last 300 meters and starts docking, you get exploded.
Hence: The need for quick dock bookmarks. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2864
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:49:00 -
[91] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:When you hit the "dock" button, the game is supposed to warp you into docking range of the station and dock you, without any chance for you to be caught. No, it's not. It's simply supposed to warp you to the station, and then dock. Warping works as normal, docking works as normal, being caught in-between the two works as normal. If your warp lands you within <2,500 of the docking radius, that is working as normal too because that's how WTZ always works. Quote:But there is a bug: Sometimes the game warps you too far away from the station to dock immediately, and you are vulnerable for several seconds. That is not a bug GÇö it's standard warp behaviour. Except CCP has reimbursed ships lost this way. I'll not say who or where, as I cannot discuss petitions. But it has happened, and my research indicates it has happened within the last month. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24110
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:52:00 -
[92] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Except CCP has reimbursed ships lost this way. I'll not say who or where, as I cannot discuss petitions. But it has happened, and my research indicates it has happened within the last month. Incompetent GMs is the bug, then, not the standard warp behaviour.
Oh, and you can discuss petitions just fine GÇö you just can't quote personal GM communication. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Nico Laitanen
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 17:58:00 -
[93] - Quote
There's a new game called "Star Citizen" coming out in about a year or so. From what I've read, it's game mechanics may be more to your liking. But, until then, vOv. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11121
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:02:00 -
[94] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Seven billion collateral. And it wasn't even paid good. The fail started at the accept button. From Jita no less. This smells more like money laundering. Like those noob-ships full of PLEXes.
I don't know a thing about money laundering but I honestly doubt that ships full of PLEX are a reliable way to do it, given the 50% chance of losing it all. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Prince Kobol
2087
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:07:00 -
[95] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Jur Tissant wrote:CCP already has taken care of this issue in the form of tanking modules and cloaking devices. Seriously, how do you get blown up in high-sec when your ship has a covops cloak?
Ive had it happen. You uncloak when you are dumped 800 meters off the station. Before your ship moves that last 300 meters and starts docking, you get exploded. Hence: The need for quick dock bookmarks.
I've experienced where I've hit dock, the loading screen appears and then I was sitting in my pod.
Petitioned it, wasn't interested in getting anything back as it was just a frig, standard T2 fit with an empty cargo hold but was curious.
According to the GM when the loading screen appears your ship is still in space. So even thou you think you are safe, those 1 or 2 secs you are still sitting in space. |

Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
689
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:08:00 -
[96] - Quote
Wild @ss idea CCP should of stuck with, to stop the whining so the forum hamster's don't have to be running 24/7 with only a short break.
1. No market skills, its seeded straight from NPC source. NPC isk sink? You all whine about SOANDSO and XYZ factor type makes to much isk......well, if you stop trading it around now its just a grind to be able to afford to fly anything. CCP can at anytime just raise/lower the cost as needed.
2. Industry skills...seriously why would anybody waste their damn time with that boring grind. Minesweeper and Solitaire are more complex then the sit in asteroid belt, target rock, hit F1, wait till hold full, blow up to random bored dude hiding in high sec cause he can't take being blown up in low/null (this isn't the miner, this is the ganker...cause he is protected by CONCORD). And the POS set up....second job, games are for fun not a second grind.
3. Trade skills....remove them. Contracts. Remove them. Everything is NPC seeded, NPC isk sink, CCP discretion when something is to cheap and/or expensive.
4. ???
5. Problem solved. Less interaction through scams, less whining from dudes who should already know how EVE is meant to play (paranoid, don't lose what you cannot afford), more PEW PEW without the stupid obvious traps set up that induce the whines.
Like I said, wild @ss idea. Just lock target and explode people, don't need to lead them on to catch them.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24112
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:12:00 -
[97] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Wild @ss idea CCP should of stuck with, to stop the whining so the forum hamster's don't have to be running 24/7 with only a short break. You got one thing right at least: it's an ass idea. Let's break vast portions of the game because some players are too incompetent to play it. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20438
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:19:00 -
[98] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Wild @ss idea CCP should of stuck with, to stop the whining so the forum hamster's don't have to be running 24/7 with only a short break.
1. No market skills, its seeded straight from NPC source. NPC isk sink? You all whine about SOANDSO and XYZ factor type makes to much isk......well, if you stop trading it around now its just a grind to be able to afford to fly anything. CCP can at anytime just raise/lower the cost as needed.
2. Industry skills...seriously why would anybody waste their damn time with that boring grind. Minesweeper and Solitaire are more complex then the sit in asteroid belt, target rock, hit F1, wait till hold full, blow up to random bored dude hiding in high sec cause he can't take being blown up in low/null (this isn't the miner, this is the ganker...cause he is protected by CONCORD). And the POS set up....second job, games are for fun not a second grind.
3. Trade skills....remove them. Contracts. Remove them. Everything is NPC seeded, NPC isk sink, CCP discretion when something is to cheap and/or expensive.
4. ???
5. Problem solved. Less interaction through scams, less whining from dudes who should already know how EVE is meant to play (paranoid, don't lose what you cannot afford), more PEW PEW without the stupid obvious traps set up that induce the whines.
Like I said, wild @ss idea. Just lock target and explode people, don't need to lead them on to catch them.
It's called X-Afterbirth, you should buy it and stop shitting up the Eve forums with your ill thought out, game breaking idiocy.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Charax Bouclier
Emerald Drama Theatrics
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:28:00 -
[99] - Quote
Rookie here, just trying to understand the mistake for my own purposes. Let's exclude the "shoulda used an alt/not accept the obvious scam" dialogue.
OK, guy is with his cloaked hauler, and in the system where he wants to dock and selects the dock option.
From what I understand, you lose cloak when you initiate dock and/or are within 2 KM of any object. Some say a bookmark should be set beside the station and that you should warp there and dock. In either case, you're in range of the ganker, so I guess we're somehow talking about which approach saves you a tiny bit of time docking which may save yor buns.
If someone just took the dock approach, I am guessing that you might not immediately be in docking range and/or the gankers might be camped in that jump location to force a decloak as soon as you exit warp and start blasting before a dock procedure can be engaged/completed.
Am I understanding this correctly? Sorry...rookie here. Just might be cheaper for me to learn from OTHER people's mistakes than my own. :) |

Prince Kobol
2087
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:35:00 -
[100] - Quote
Charax Bouclier wrote:Rookie here, just trying to understand the mistake for my own purposes. Let's exclude the "shoulda used an alt/not accept the obvious scam" dialogue.
OK, guy is with his cloaked hauler, and in the system where he wants to dock and selects the dock option.
From what I understand, you lose cloak when you initiate dock and/or are within 2 KM of any object. Some say a bookmark should be set beside the station and that you should warp there and dock. In either case, you're in range of the ganker, so I guess we're somehow talking about which approach saves you a tiny bit of time docking which may save yor buns.
If someone just took the dock approach, I am guessing that you might not immediately be in docking range and/or the gankers might be camped in that jump location to force a decloak as soon as you exit warp and start blasting before a dock procedure can be engaged/completed.
Am I understanding this correctly? Sorry...rookie here. Just might be cheaper for me to learn from OTHER people's mistakes than my own. :)
Some stations have terrible docking ranges, in other words when you hit dock you will land just outside the docking range so you will have to fly for a few seconds before you can dock.
What they did to this guys was actually very clever.
They chose a system which was at the end of a pipe so could see him coming way before he actually arrived in system, giving them plenty of time to setup.
Also the stations in that system have horrible docks / undocks.
Rule of thumb is always scout out a route / system with an alt before using it, if you do not have an alt then grab a frig and make a few BM's to minimise the risk. |

Leoric Firesword
Dark Fusion Industries
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 18:42:00 -
[101] - Quote
see your first mistake was doing the hauling on the same character that accepted the contract. You forgot rule #1, trust no one.
I don't haul often, but when I do, it's certainly not with the character that accepted the contract. |
|

CCP Falcon
8434

|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:15:00 -
[102] - Quote
Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec?
CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive.
If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you.
Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.

CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Ra' zutao
The Ascended Fleet Intrepid Crossing
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:18:00 -
[103] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Ra' Zutao's personal escort services for haulers is available in High Sec areas for 20% of your cargo Holds's value, I can't guarantee you'll live but i'll still take your money :)
Wait thats a bad business plan..  |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20442
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:20:00 -
[104] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  keeping it real
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5368
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:22:00 -
[105] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Falcon of my heart "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2131
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:23:00 -
[106] - Quote
Lets imagine something more boring then 100% safe hauling ... trying .. trying .. nope. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4502
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:23:00 -
[107] - Quote
CONCORD: The Carebear's hot-drop* *response time may vary Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |

Captain Davy
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:30:00 -
[108] - Quote
I know this is not this case... but come on... freighter ganking is too much easy this days, it is just stupid to see empty freighters get ganked in high sec just for the lolz.. CCP should really address that. Its ok if a dumb dude dies in a 3B+ freighter in high sec... but empy freighter is a little too much for me. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1055
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:36:00 -
[109] - Quote
Captain Davy wrote:I know this is not this case... but come on... freighter ganking is too much easy this days, it is just stupid to see empty freighters get ganked in high sec just for the lolz.. CCP should really address that. Its ok if a dumb dude dies in a 3B+ freighter in high sec... but empy freighter is a little too much for me. So people should only be able to have fun if the fun activity in question meets your standards, otherwise CCP should step in and stop them?
Just want to be clear here. [witty image] - Stream |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1600
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:45:00 -
[110] - Quote
CCP Falcon for president. Epic Space Cat |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2773
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:46:00 -
[111] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you.Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
You KNOW that's a lie, right? You would need one hell of a profit margin to pay other players for boring themselves to death as they become useless extra guns on top of CONCORD's once in a blue moon. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Glasgow Dunlop
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
176
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:46:00 -
[112] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
When can we start bribing the 'slightly dodgy' ones to you know, look the other way in certain events 
twitter: @glasgowdunlop-á TDSIN Recruitment Director : Join 'TDSIN pub' Glasgow Meet Organiser
|

Boom McCondor
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
34
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 19:47:00 -
[113] - Quote
Glasgow Dunlop wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  When can we start bribing the 'slightly dodgy' ones to you know, look the other way in certain events  Isn't that a wardec?
|

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1243
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:06:00 -
[114] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:You KNOW that's a lie, right? You would need one hell of a profit margin to pay other players for boring themselves to death as they become useless extra guns on top of CONCORD's once in a blue moon. There are other measures as well. Don't be a profitable kill is the easiest among the options. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:23:00 -
[115] - Quote
CCP Falcon, you are my hero.  |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2773
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:25:00 -
[116] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:You KNOW that's a lie, right? You would need one hell of a profit margin to pay other players for boring themselves to death as they become useless extra guns on top of CONCORD's once in a blue moon. There are other measures as well. Don't be a profitable kill is the easiest among the options.
I was adressing Falcon's false point on the use of bringing in guns, didn't intend to write a treaty on how to stay alive.  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5368
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:26:00 -
[117] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you.Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  You KNOW that's a lie, right? You would need one hell of a profit margin to pay other players for boring themselves to death as they become useless extra guns on top of CONCORD's once in a blue moon.
Ganking that Tornado before warp in would have worked perfectly fine. They're not exactly the tankiest ships around.
Otherwise, Grab a Web, Grab a Blackbird, Grab RR. Have someone in fleet put a frigate deep into the docking circle and warp to them so you don't end up off station.
Bringing friends takes many different forms, and the most effective form may differ for different situations. In this case, guns would have worked great. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4508
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:35:00 -
[118] - Quote
That whole loss could have been avoided by warping in at 100 (or 75 or 50 for variety) while cloaked and spotting the Tornado on grid. Then you move a few km off center, post ":P" in local and go for a coffee. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |

Hiyora Akachi
Yulai Guard Yulai Federation
220
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:40:00 -
[119] - Quote
Wow, you got ganked in a Blockade Runner doing a contract that was obviously bait without a scout and now want CCP to do something to stop the ebil gankers.
Props to Luukje and Clonekiller on this one. |

Darkblad
Hilfe is like Free Entertainment
441
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:50:00 -
[120] - Quote
Hauling a total of 7 billion in collateral, with that low market value of the four contracts' contents didn't ring a bell?
Think I'll just keep CCP Falcon's post for future quotation, so thanks for this thread, somehow  EVE Infolinks -+-áOld and new-áPortraits |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4326
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 20:52:00 -
[121] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:You KNOW that's a lie, right? You would need one hell of a profit margin to pay other players for boring themselves to death as they become useless extra guns on top of CONCORD's once in a blue moon. There are other measures as well. Don't be a profitable kill is the easiest among the options. dont be the easiest among the options =][= |

Slicr
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:01:00 -
[122] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Think you might need a vacation since you do not realize this is just a game. To compare anything in the real world to justify something in a game is pretty lame.
Excuse me will I go put 3,900 m3 worth of cargo in my secure giant cargo container that has a volume of 3,000 m3. I believe in being Pro-Active as Opposed to Reactive. Reactive tends to be more costly in time and money.
|

Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:02:00 -
[123] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Yes indeed, guns are very effective against gankers. |

Slicr
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:13:00 -
[124] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aqriue wrote:Wild @ss idea CCP should of stuck with, to stop the whining so the forum hamster's don't have to be running 24/7 with only a short break. You got one thing right at least: it's an ass idea. Let's break vast portions of the game because some players are too incompetent to play it.
The game has been dumbed down considerably, so why not more?
I believe in being Pro-Active as Opposed to Reactive. Reactive tends to be more costly in time and money.
|

Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
380
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:38:00 -
[125] - Quote
Sequester Risalo wrote:Misunderstood Genius wrote:You can get around this with - an insta-undock off-grid (especially in the major trading hub systems) - using a cloaky Blockade Runner
If you (and some others) had bothered to actually read the thread before posting your valued opinion, you would have noticed that the lady did in fact fly a blockade runner and was in the process of docking when the incident happened. Please explain how insta-undocking would have helped in that situation. Thank you
Warp to zero and "dock" commands sometimes doesn't land you zero on station. Sometimes you have to slowburn it as seen here.
TL;DR her BR didn't land on zero. |

Chris Winter
Winters Are Coming
538
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:44:00 -
[126] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. The problem is, with the way ganking works, bringing guns doesn't make your hauling any safer. |

Flay Nardieu
Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars
48
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:45:00 -
[127] - Quote
I think of gankers as slime, however in this case they where bonafide pirates. The events involving the OP unfolded in true Pirate fashion. they set bait and organized a trap. The pirates should be commended on their planning and execution.
In my view true pirates fit well in EVE and their actions are viable and sensible aggressive actions against non-combatants funding their activities by doing so (ie recover some or all of the cargo PLUS the collateral payment). In contrast most 'pro' gankers have to subsidize the ganking to get ahead. Seriously, multiple ships losses to CONCORD to take out mining barges there is no way in hell a group could turn a profit doing that.
So Pirates = Clever opportunists plying their trade in space Gankers = Losers who think they are elite, feeding off the whining of their 'prey' but in fact have to subsidize their antics to even be able to continue their harassment. Rise up against the flawed S&I changes! CCP no more $$$ from me until then.-á Three accounts funded by buying PLEX with $$$ now idle and this one waiting out the quarterly renewal. |

Zuteh
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:47:00 -
[128] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
If CONCORD was to be a deterrent then the ganking character would be thrown in Eve-jail for a few months. Currently it is a puny consequence which the gankers completely mitigate with throw-away fits. IMO this is the reason Eve stagnated and is declining, it drives off fresh blood who can't be arsed with a cesspool of wannabe pirates getting their kicks out of E-tears. |

Paranoid Loyd
1610
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:48:00 -
[129] - Quote
Slicr wrote: To compare anything in the real world to justify something in a game is pretty lame.
In a previous thread Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Attributing real values unto digital acts within a video game is a nono, not pointing out apt similarities between the two.
It's a subtle difference, but it is different. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Paranoid Loyd
1611
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:58:00 -
[130] - Quote
Zuteh wrote: Currently it is a puny consequence which the gankers completely mitigate with throw-away fits.
It is of no consequence to make yourself aware of the danger and to take precautions accordingly. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2866
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 21:59:00 -
[131] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Except that bringing guns or an escort does not work. Here is what happens: Your ship exits warp and explodes in less than a second. When in that sequence was I supposed to identify the attacker, lock the attacker and destroy the attacker first, especially as shooting first gets me CONCORDed? When in that sequence was an escort supposed to help? Well, he could have told me to not warp in the first place. But I can do that by not logging in at all. CCP Falcon, is that the outcome you want to see? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |

KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
715
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:02:00 -
[132] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Ah yes, the old blame the victim defense.
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2774
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:06:00 -
[133] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Except that bringing guns or an escort does not work. Here is what happens: Your ship exits warp and explodes in less than a second. When in that sequence was I supposed to identify the attacker, lock the attacker and destroy the attacker first, especially as shooting first gets me CONCORDed? When in that sequence was an escort supposed to help? Well, he could have told me to not warp in the first place. But I can do that by not logging in at all. CCP Falcon, is that the outcome you want to see?
That's a more detailed version of why Falcon's point about the guns it's a lie. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
713
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:07:00 -
[134] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
This might be true but he didn't really lose a Prorat to gank here. He lost it to AWOX using the contract system.
My advice to the OP, use faucets like everyone else and ignore all things player driven. It's mostly bait.
|

Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
62
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:10:00 -
[135] - Quote
Rule number 357 of EVE: The word safe doesn't have meaning any place in EVE.
... and it was probably CODE who shot you... Bunch of retards... |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
77
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:21:00 -
[136] - Quote
Nice bait post CCP Falcon. You have shifted this thread from; "OP here are ways you can do it better" to "wah, wah, wah." |

NEONOVUS
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
915
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:25:00 -
[137] - Quote
Meanwhile I just leveled badger as my most prolific pvp ship after thrasher
\0/ ha suck on that gankers, you will of course in a few days, again
Maybe I should try procurer next just because
Also echoing, Falcon do tell how guns protect alpha ganks much less swarm ganks Seeing as I have been around groups using double ecm bursting scorpions and they just threw even more ISK away |

Natural CloneKiller
Ukranian Hauling Co.
31
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:28:00 -
[138] - Quote
    |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3473
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:47:00 -
[139] - Quote
You know what would have been really effective here?
One jump out from the destination, reship to an empty Iteron. Go and set off the trap, and have your alt loot the Tornado. Easily pays for your Iteron.
Then, go and bring the real ship in.
Safety is something you can achieve in highsec, if you work for it. It is not given to you for free. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 - Gank incursion runners, win prizes! August 26-Sept 30. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |

Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
713
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 22:52:00 -
[140] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:You know what would have been really effective here?
One jump out from the destination, reship to an empty Iteron. Go and set off the trap, and have your alt loot the Tornado. Easily pays for your Iteron.
Then, go and bring the real ship in.
Safety is something you can achieve in highsec, if you work for it. It is not given to you for free.
Or he could use an Impel. They overheat tank to 220K
Though I still work on the logic, if they don't want to do it, I don't want to do it. A Prorat cargo hold is around 12K. Any contract M3 that small, screams bait to me. |

Milan Nantucket
New Eden Misfits
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:02:00 -
[141] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Velicitia wrote:All those low-slots you have ARE NOT for expanded cargohold II ... Milan Nantucket wrote:When you dont have defensive stuff in your fit what do you expect. Drop two of the carohold expanders and put n a dc2 and a bulkhead2
Then again you already knew that and chose not to bother. You seriously propose a *tank* on a *Prorator*? You've never flown a Blockade Runner, did you? Your tank is your cloak. Never getting locked is the only thing that will save you. Putting bulkheads in there that will make you get caught more easily is the exact opposite of saving your ass. Actually I have two blockade runners.... both have bulkheads and dc2. Your cloak doesnt protect you from a smartbombing battle ship on a gate.... you also cant cloak with 2500 meters of the station.
If your read the op you would see why you need them. |

Vyl Vit
698
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:04:00 -
[142] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:But you already know she didn't deserve it and her attackers must be "sociopaths" and sufferers of "mental disorders" Go you, I'm sure you are a credit to your creed. I have noticed you on more than one occasion pronounce what people deserve, and do not deserve. Creed? (vitriol removed for the sake of civility) Anyone with any sense has already left town. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:04:00 -
[143] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:Rule number 357 of EVE: The word safe doesn't have meaning any place in EVE.
... and it was probably CODE who shot you... Bunch of retards...
Really? come on look further than that. I deserve more credit for my work than to be compared to a few freighter gankers. atleast check out a killboard before you spread lies! : / dont CODE always gank under their own flag anyway to show the kills on their kb? ;p |

Maekchu
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
74
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:08:00 -
[144] - Quote
What a great post OP.
You are a true entertainer. Damn, gave me some good laughs. Thanks for that! |

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Unleashed Pestilence
969
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:11:00 -
[145] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  I'd love to see CCP provide protection to people's haulers by logging in in logi ships! That would probably be enough to get me back into ganking.
Luukje wrote:Celthric Kanerian wrote:Rule number 357 of EVE: The word safe doesn't have meaning any place in EVE.
... and it was probably CODE who shot you... Bunch of retards... Really? come on look further than that. I deserve more credit for my work than to be compared to a few freighter gankers. atleast check out a killboard before you spread lies! : / dont CODE always gank under their own flag anyway to show the kills on their kb? ;p Good job on these tears man! As for the New Order, not all of us are in CODE. though that is the largest new order alliance. New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:22:00 -
[146] - Quote
my personal ingame mailbox is like a museum of collected tears. this is the first guy to post on here; but i've got soooooo many hate/threaten mails  |

Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
366
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:40:00 -
[147] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Ah yes, the old blame the victim defense.
More like, explain the reality adjustment just given to the poor victim.
Either the rules apply to everyone, or they don't justly apply to anyone.
|

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1245
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 23:48:00 -
[148] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Ah yes, the old blame the victim defense. "I didn't know walking through the Serengeti in a meat-suit would get me mauled by lions. Obviously we need to get rid of all lions" if it's something the victim could prevent then blaming them is acceptable. Risks are known, and so are securities. |

Hiply Rustic
Aliastra Gallente Federation
115
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 00:26:00 -
[149] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Celthric Kanerian wrote:Rule number 357 of EVE: The word safe doesn't have meaning any place in EVE.
... and it was probably CODE who shot you... Bunch of retards... Really? come on look further than that. I deserve more credit for my work than to be compared to a few freighter gankers. atleast check out a killboard before you spread lies! : / dont CODE always gank under their own flag anyway to show the kills on their kb? ;p
I give props where I think they are deserved, and in this case that means to you.
You set up a naive 'bear hauler who accepted a contract on the character she was going to actually haul in, you somehow...wow...convinced her to cough up a 7 bil collateral payment by using a too good to be true contract offer, used a perfect location, and then polished it all off with a lock 'n pop between WTZ-decloak and dock.
Well played.
The only carebears who are going to have any long term enjoyment in this game are those of us who realize we're seals in an ocean full of great whites and killer whales. I'm usually faster or smarter, but sometimes I'm just dead. I don't mind the odds, I like to swim. Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the stong-willied need apply.
|

admiral root
Red Galaxy
1548
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 00:28:00 -
[150] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Ah yes, the old blame the victim defense.
There's no victim described in the OP, just an Eve player whose knowledge of game mechanics wasn't up to the task, or who is challenged in the grey matter department, or who was too lazy to do it right. A combination of all three is possible. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 00:40:00 -
[151] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
If CONCORD was such a "deterrent" , ganking wouldn't exist. It's called "suicide ganking" for a reason.
Now typically, a ganker won't sacrifice their ship if the value of the target is less than the value of their own ship. This was one of the defenses against ganking. What happens when the ganker doesn't care about isk lost vs isk destroyed? That defense becomes obsolete. Buffing you tank to the nines helps. If CONCORD can show up and clear house before the gankers can break your tank, then chances are they won't gank you in the first place. However, once again, with enough fire power on the field, no amount of tank will save you. Again, the system falls apart when the ganker doesn't care about isk lost vs isk destroyed.
Now in the case of the OP, there were steps they could've taken. However, the only sure way not to get ganked when the ganker doesn't care about isk is to simply not undock and if that's the problem, then it becomes pointless to even log in (read: pointless to even support the game financially). If it gets to that point, well, all I have to say is I hope you don't like working for CCP.
There is actually a fine line between playing the game and causing trouble for the game. WRT the above defense, that's part of the game. Isk lost vs isk destroyed. So if you lost isk to a gank and the ganker lost less isk than you in the process, then you did something wrong. When players start ganking for the sake of ganking just to grief others and don't care about how much isk they lose to do so, then that line is crossed. They are no longer playing the game, they are simply hurting the game. As it stand, if a ganker follows you around from system to system and repeatedly ganks you (no one else, just you) CCP has considered this to fall under harassment. I know this from someone I know in game. A person in game ganked someone we knew, so the person I know ganked them back again, and again, and again, and then the person I know got a warning from CCP. No doubt a complaint by that ganker. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24127
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 00:47:00 -
[152] - Quote
Captain Davy wrote:I know this is not this case... but come on... freighter ganking is too much easy this days That is indeed not the case. If it was GÇ£too much easyGÇ¥ it would be a very common occurrence. Instead, it's something you can go through your entire EVE life without seeing and something that is the domain of a very select few niche outfits.
Vincent Athena wrote:Except that bringing guns or an escort does not work. Here is what happens: Your ship exits warp and explodes in less than a second. Except that your ship will not explode in less than a second, because the server code simply does not allow for it. You have to stop being invulnerable, you have to be locked, and you have to actually take more damage than your total EHP. Warping to -40km and insta-docking with AP means the first two never happen; fitting a tank means the third never will.
Quote:When in that sequence was I supposed to identify the attacker, lock the attacker and destroy the attacker first, especially as shooting first gets me CONCORDed? Oh, about a minute or so before your hauler arrives on grid.
Angeal MacNova wrote:If CONCORD was such a "deterrent" , ganking wouldn't exist. It's called "suicide ganking" for a reason. No. Other way around: if it wasn't such a deterrent, ganking wouldn't exist. Instead, it would be a wholesale, carefree, and unavoidable slaughter. The fact that ganks are as rare as they are shows that the deterrent works. You can fly around for hours on end without even being locked out, that's how good a deterrent it is: it even keeps people from doing stuff that isn't even being punished.
Quote:What happens when the ganker doesn't care about isk lost vs isk destroyed? What happens then is that people are playing the game just to have fun rather than just be a slave to the mighty ISK. It's a good thing. It means they are rather selflessly helping the game economy without actually getting anything in return. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Paranoid Loyd
1613
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 00:52:00 -
[153] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote: When players start ganking for the sake of ganking just to grief others and don't care about how much isk they lose to do so, then that line is crossed. They are no longer playing the game, they are simply hurting the game.
If I gank an empty freighter then the demand for said freighter just increased by one, the demand for all the ships used to perform the gank also went up by an equal number. Ships are supposed to explode, it's what drives the economy and is therefore good for the game.
"PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
8730
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 01:16:00 -
[154] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. The problem is, with the way ganking works, bringing guns doesn't make your hauling any safer.
You mean packing a sidearm in the industrial's gun locker?
Simplifying player vs. player mechanics to "I brought gun.. I can't die" may be your initial mistake.
Hauler defense is a bit more complicated than that. And the best defense is not being present at the scene of the crime. Here is an exhaustive checklist by Super spikanator. ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5370
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 01:46:00 -
[155] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Except that bringing guns or an escort does not work. Here is what happens: Your ship exits warp and explodes in less than a second. When in that sequence was I supposed to identify the attacker, lock the attacker and destroy the attacker first, especially as shooting first gets me CONCORDed? When in that sequence was an escort supposed to help? Well, he could have told me to not warp in the first place. But I can do that by not logging in at all. CCP Falcon, is that the outcome you want to see? Maybe it would be better if you adjust how warping to stations works, so my ship actually warps to docking range. Customer services will thank you.
You send a scout, notice the Tornado lingering suspiciously outside the station, and gank the tornado. They don't hold up to much more than a stiff breeze.
As soon as you're sure they're gonna pop, you start your warp in to the station (where you have an insta-dock).
Nobody said the guns have to be right next to your transport. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Duchess Amarrian
Astro Technologies Apocalypse Now.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 01:55:00 -
[156] - Quote
I just want to say a big thank you to those people who did give some positives out of this. As for the macho ego's out there I thank you for wasting your time in this post as it didn't really contribute to anything apart from many http addresses.
It was hard to take a punch below the belt in eve but hey i take it and will only get better to not get another one soon. I love the game thats for sure. I got blown up instantly coming out of cloak whilst at the station in docking range. It sounds like I"m guilty for this action by the sound of some people in this post, amazing.
Anyways thank you and enjoy. |

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4521
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 01:59:00 -
[157] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:If CONCORD was such a "deterrent" Have you ever been spawn-killed on a badly managed PvP server? Imagine every starter system being like that. CONCORD is a damn good deterrent. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 01:59:00 -
[158] - Quote
WRT ganking.
Constantly losing a ship to perform the gank will increase the demand of the type of ship commonly used. Price inflates = bad. The target ships are often haulers and miners. Again, they are losing a ship and so the demand for these ships go up. Price inflates = bad.
Now that is just the short term.
Long term, when the price goes up and the gap between production cost and market price widens, more people make them. Supply goes up, price come back down, and the moving quantity increases even further. This is good but....
There is a problem.
The target ships are the indy players. So their ship loss becomes an expense that is taken into consideration. So even if the profit margin widens, this increase in revenue doesn't equate to an increase in profit. Profit = Revenue - Expenses. So despite the increase in price, the market doesn't see the influx of new producers and the price inflates. Even in the long term which is bad.
It goes even deeper than that.
The indy guys being ganked are being done so by destroyers mostly. So they have an incentive not to produce them if they are only going to be used against them. They'll produce other things instead. So now the price of whatever flavor of the month ganking ship will inflate even in the long term. This is bad, especially for the gankers. Talk about shooting your own feet lol.
Not only that but the added expense is factored in when goods are produced. So two things happen;
1. If the indy players are just in it for the isk and the loss of their ships becomes too much of an expense, they'll do something else like run missions. Less producers means inflated prices. This is compounded if the other thing these players do causes them to lose ships as this will now increase the demand also.
2. Those that do stick it out will factor the expense into their selling price and the price of all goods will increase. Again, inflation.
So while the act of ganking in itself is not bad and can be good for the economy, the gankers' favorite choice of target is bad for the games economy in both the short and long term.
|

Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:00:00 -
[159] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:If CONCORD was such a "deterrent" Have you ever been spawn-killed on a badly managed PvP server? Imagine every starter system being like that. CONCORD is a damn good deterrent.
Actually CCP is a damn good deterrent for that sort of thing. Ever gank newbies in starter systems within EVE online? Good way to get banned. |

Paranoid Loyd
1615
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:07:00 -
[160] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:WRT ganking.
Your whole post is under the false pretense that people are one or the other. The fact is I don't know one ganker who doesn't enjoy the industry side of the game. I don't manufacture catalysts because there is very little profit, if the margin were to rise enough I would start making them. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2134
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:08:00 -
[161] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:I just want to say a big thank you to those people who did give some positives out of this. As for the macho ego's out there I thank you for wasting your time in this post as it didn't really contribute to anything apart from many http addresses.
It was hard to take a punch below the belt in eve but hey i take it and will only get better to not get another one soon. I love the game thats for sure. I got blown up instantly coming out of cloak whilst at the station in docking range. It sounds like I"m guilty for this action by the sound of some people in this post, amazing.
Anyways thank you and enjoy.
Not guilty, but incredibly na+»ve. Some good life advice for you, if in the real world is some stranger wants $50,000 collateral to transport something for him in your car, DONT DO IT! ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24131
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:13:00 -
[162] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Not only that but the added expense is factored in when goods are produced. So two things happen;
1. If the indy players are just in it for the isk and the loss of their ships becomes too much of an expense, they'll do something else like run missions. Less producers means inflated prices. This is compounded if the other thing these players do causes them to lose ships as this will now increase the demand also.
2. Those that do stick it out will factor the expense into their selling price and the price of all goods will increase. Again, inflation.
So while the act of ganking in itself is not bad and can be good for the economy, the gankers' favorite choice of target is bad for the games economy in both the short and long term. GǪexcept for the simple fact that the production capacity vastly outpaces the destruction capacity and that gankers simply aren't capable of affecting the entire market in such a way that inflation would occur.
And that's without considering Loyd's point above: that a lot of ganking effectively just amounts to getting rid of the competition for a given product. It will not lead to a reduction in production or an increase in prices GÇö just a shift of market share. And even without that detail, there's just too many industrialists who have no problems with ganking for it to have the effects you describe. Industrialists, as a group, are not actually being targeted GÇö stupid haulers are. They're rather different groups. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3477
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:28:00 -
[163] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Not only that but the added expense is factored in when goods are produced. So two things happen;
1. If the indy players are just in it for the isk and the loss of their ships becomes too much of an expense, they'll do something else like run missions. Less producers means inflated prices. This is compounded if the other thing these players do causes them to lose ships as this will now increase the demand also.
2. Those that do stick it out will factor the expense into their selling price and the price of all goods will increase. Again, inflation.
So while the act of ganking in itself is not bad and can be good for the economy, the gankers' favorite choice of target is bad for the games economy in both the short and long term. GǪexcept for the simple fact that the production capacity vastly outpaces the destruction capacity and that gankers simply aren't capable of affecting the entire market in such a way that inflation would occur. And that's without considering Loyd's point above: that a lot of ganking effectively just amounts to getting rid of the competition for a given product. It will not lead to a reduction in production or an increase in prices GÇö just a shift of market share. And even without that detail, there's just too many industrialists who have no problems with ganking for it to have the effects you describe. Industrialists, as a group, are not actually being targeted GÇö stupid haulers are. They're rather different groups.
Confirming that, as a starship and module producer, I'm happy to write off the costs of ganks I carry out as a necessary marketing expense.
Plus, they are fun. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 - Gank incursion runners, win prizes! August 26-Sept 30. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:31:00 -
[164] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Not only that but the added expense is factored in when goods are produced. So two things happen;
1. If the indy players are just in it for the isk and the loss of their ships becomes too much of an expense, they'll do something else like run missions. Less producers means inflated prices. This is compounded if the other thing these players do causes them to lose ships as this will now increase the demand also.
2. Those that do stick it out will factor the expense into their selling price and the price of all goods will increase. Again, inflation.
So while the act of ganking in itself is not bad and can be good for the economy, the gankers' favorite choice of target is bad for the games economy in both the short and long term. GǪexcept for the simple fact that the production capacity vastly outpaces the destruction capacity and that gankers simply aren't capable of affecting the entire market in such a way that inflation would occur. And that's without considering Loyd's point above: that a lot of ganking effectively just amounts to getting rid of the competition for a given product. It will not lead to a reduction in production or an increase in prices GÇö just a shift of market share. And even without that detail, there's just too many industrialists who have no problems with ganking for it to have the effects you describe. Industrialists, as a group, are not actually being targeted GÇö stupid haulers are. They're rather different groups.
Too bad that gankers have enough numbers and gank often enough to effect the market to do just that.
Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. This is directly due to gankers ganking miners.
Getting rid of competition for a product is also bad for an economy. I could go into detail but I'll just state it as simple as possible.
Competitive market = good. Monopoly = bad. |

45thtiger 0109
90
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:32:00 -
[165] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
I agree with the above quote well said CCP Falcon  |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20465
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:34:00 -
[166] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Confirming that, as a starship and module producer, I'm happy to write off the costs of ganks I carry out as a necessary marketing expense.
Plus, they are fun. Welcome to a world where "cut throat business practices" are exactly that.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24134
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:35:00 -
[167] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Too bad that gankers have enough numbers and gank often enough to effect the market to do just that. No, they really don't. The minute number of ganks and the numerous historical cases that demonstrate the instant bounce-back of the market demonstrate this very clearly.
Quote:Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. Uh-huh. And the numerous changes to the Skiff itself, to the underlying Procurer, and to industry as a whole definitely has nothing to do with that. Yup yup yup.
Quote:Competitive market = good. Monopoly = bad. GǪwhich is why ganking is a good thing: it ensures that there can never be a monopoly.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
380
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:39:00 -
[168] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Not only that but the added expense is factored in when goods are produced. So two things happen;
1. If the indy players are just in it for the isk and the loss of their ships becomes too much of an expense, they'll do something else like run missions. Less producers means inflated prices. This is compounded if the other thing these players do causes them to lose ships as this will now increase the demand also.
2. Those that do stick it out will factor the expense into their selling price and the price of all goods will increase. Again, inflation.
So while the act of ganking in itself is not bad and can be good for the economy, the gankers' favorite choice of target is bad for the games economy in both the short and long term. GǪexcept for the simple fact that the production capacity vastly outpaces the destruction capacity and that gankers simply aren't capable of affecting the entire market in such a way that inflation would occur. And that's without considering Loyd's point above: that a lot of ganking effectively just amounts to getting rid of the competition for a given product. It will not lead to a reduction in production or an increase in prices GÇö just a shift of market share. And even without that detail, there's just too many industrialists who have no problems with ganking for it to have the effects you describe. Industrialists, as a group, are not actually being targeted GÇö stupid haulers are. They're rather different groups. Too bad that gankers have enough numbers and gank often enough to effect the market to do just that. Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. This is directly due to gankers ganking miners. Getting rid of competition for a product is also bad for an economy. I could go into detail but I'll just state it as simple as possible. Competitive market = good. Monopoly = bad.
Why don't you show us that gankers destroy more catalysts and indies than the total production output of New Eden? And PLEASE do go into the details. Saying stuff like "This stuff is bad because REASONS but I won't tell you what the REASON is because it's too hard so I'll just say it's bad stuff" is not exactly a very convincing argument.
So please show us your economic data that gankers outstrip the production capacities of every player in new eden. |

Paranoid Loyd
1617
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:46:00 -
[169] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. This is directly due to gankers ganking miners.
Last suicide gank August 17th, MTD I could find 5 "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5370
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:48:00 -
[170] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Competitive market = good. Monopoly = bad.
Why is a monopoly bad for the game if it arises from player actions?
Anything done by players can be undone by other players.
Anyway, there are vanishingly few monopolizeable goods in EVE*, so a discussion of the merits of monopoly power is pretty much irrelevant.
*The barriers to entry in EVE production are shockingly low. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20465
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:48:00 -
[171] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Too bad that gankers have enough numbers and gank often enough to effect the market to do just that.
Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. This is directly due to gankers ganking miners. As well as the stuff Tippia has pointed out there'll be people profiteering off the disproportionate fear of gankers. It's not hard to avoid gankers when you're mining, being at the keyboard is a major part of it, and it looks like people are learning that.
Quote:Getting rid of competition for a product is also bad for an economy. I could go into detail but I'll just state it as simple as possible.
Competitive market = good. Monopoly = bad. The only way to have a monopoly is to have complete control of the product, OTEC managed it for a while and the ice interdictions caused a blip in the market. It took bitter enemies negotiating an uneasy partial truce and a trade agreement to carry OTEC off,
With regards to production specifically the fact that pretty much anybody can build a ship or module make the kind of market manipulation you're talking about unsustainable for anything but the short term.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5370
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:49:00 -
[172] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. Uh-huh. And the numerous changes to the Skiff itself, to the underlying Procurer, and to industry as a whole definitely has nothing to do with that. Yup yup yup.
Arguably, some of those changes were caused by people ganking miners. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Claud Tiberius
61
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:51:00 -
[173] - Quote
OP should transport in a full-on tanked BS. There are probably a few with enough cargo space. If not, I'm sure any shield tanked ship with cargo extenders will do fine. So long as your in high sec, they wont attack you since your tank should survive long for concord to arrive assuming its a small hostile fleet (it usually is). Once upon a time the Golem had a Raven hull and it looked good. Then it transformed into a plataduck. The end. |

Paranoid Loyd
1617
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:56:00 -
[174] - Quote
Claud Tiberius wrote:OP should transport in a full-on tanked BS. There are probably a few with enough cargo space. If not, I'm sure any shield tanked ship with cargo extenders will do fine. So long as your in high sec, they wont attack you since your tank should survive long for concord to arrive  assuming its a small hostile fleet (it usually is). Its also quite easy to avoid them. Jump from station to station, figure out who's following you, how many there are. Bait them into attacking you and if you can, dock to be out of harms way. Let concord free the road :P
Please read the thread before posting. Your recommendation would not even work let alone how idiotic of a solution it is to the problem.
Unless of course you are trolling, then good job. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
8786
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:58:00 -
[175] - Quote
I think he might be saying they are higher price since the Skiff is the only viable Exhumer. Higher demand = higher price?
Looks like price jumped 50M ISK (33%) since April.
Angeal, if you see a product earning 50M more a pop in the market, why don't you manufacture and sell them?
Edit: Forums replace ampersands with silly garbage, so I replace the eve-marketdata.com link with a goo.gl link. ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9241
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:00:00 -
[176] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
This is why I play EVE. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Paranoid Loyd
1617
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:03:00 -
[177] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:I think he might be saying they are higher price since the Skiff is the only viable Exhumer. Higher demand = higher price? Looks like price jumped 50M ISK (33%) since April. Angeal, if you see a product earning 50M more a pop in the market, why don't you manufacture and sell them? Edit: Forums replace ampersands with silly garbage, so I replace the eve-marketdata.com link with a goo.gl link.
You're probably right, I was distracted by a target in-game.  "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
8786
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:07:00 -
[178] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:You're probably right, I was distracted by a target in-game. 
I hope one day I grow up to be a Paranoid Loyd. ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Michael1995
Lazerhawks
158
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:15:00 -
[179] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
You should invest in insta-docks. One does not simply buy their way into Goonswarm. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech Masters of Flying Objects
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:25:00 -
[180] - Quote
I've done mining. Even trained up into exhumers. I couldn't do it for very long. Way too boring for my taste. I'd rather just run missions. I do, however, want to get in a position to just manufacture my own gear. Reprocess loot for the minerals, use bounties and mission rewards to buy the T2 mats and make it myself.
Being at the keyboard is a fallacy. Doesn't make a difference. All it'll do is prevent a podding. If you don't bother with implants and don't have a super high SP, then this is a trivial cost. Actually it's a bonus since you'll have a kill right. Now you can gank the ganker without concord involvement. |

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1328
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:33:00 -
[181] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you.
Except it's high sec, and either the gankers warp on top of you and alpha you before you can get a lock on them, or they're still of a security status where you can't shoot them until they open fire, at which point they alpha you anyway.
Highsec is broken. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9242
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:40:00 -
[182] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Except it's high sec, and either the gankers warp on top of you and alpha you before you can get a lock on them, or they're still of a security status where you can't shoot them until they open fire, at which point they alpha you anyway. Highsec is broken.
Except for the part where the OP had a cloaking device and clearly failed to use it.
Or the part where, had they had an escort and thereby by definition had a scout, they wouldn't have jumped into a gate with several tornados hanging around. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24138
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 03:42:00 -
[183] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Being at the keyboard is a fallacy. Doesn't make a difference. Eh, no. What kind of fallacy do you think it is?  And being at the keyboard isn't bad advice either, by the way: it helps you not be there when the ganker arrives. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1328
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 05:17:00 -
[184] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Except for the part where the OP had a cloaking device and clearly failed to use it.
Or the part where, had they had an escort and thereby by definition had a scout, they wouldn't have jumped into a gate with several tornados hanging around.
It's a valid point, but nothing at all to do with my counterpoint to Falcon saying that people should bring guns. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9243
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 05:21:00 -
[185] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Except for the part where the OP had a cloaking device and clearly failed to use it.
Or the part where, had they had an escort and thereby by definition had a scout, they wouldn't have jumped into a gate with several tornados hanging around. It's a valid point, but nothing at all to do with my counterpoint to Falcon saying that people should bring guns.
Yes, it does. If you have scouts say, in cruisers, and they bother to equip guns or ewar or whatever, if they jump in beforehand and see the tornados, or see flashies in local, they can put a stop to it before the guy in the hauler even takes the gate. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
415
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 05:26:00 -
[186] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Being at the keyboard is a fallacy. Doesn't make a difference. Eh, no. What kind of fallacy do you think it is?  And being at the keyboard isn't bad advice either, by the way: it helps you not be there when the ganker arrives. This. You can't Dscan while AFK. Back when I still mined I avoided a couple ganks in my mackinaw due to a healthy dose of paranoia, preparation, and liberal use of the 360 degree dscan. By the time the cats landed on grid all they saw were the receding tail lights of my rocket car. |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
8799
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 05:28:00 -
[187] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:
Except it's high sec, and either the gankers warp on top of you and alpha you before you can get a lock on them, or they're still of a security status where you can't shoot them until they open fire, at which point they alpha you anyway.
Highsec is broken.
So these gankers are willing to kibosh their sec status for a gank, but your "guns" are going to wait to shoot until the gankers go criminal (and have unloaded their alpha)?
You can shoot anyone you want, anytime you want. Your choice to fear the consequences is the cause of your failure, not Mr. Falcon's suggestion.
Edit: Did you know Catalysts are made of paper? ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5373
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 05:31:00 -
[188] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Except for the part where the OP had a cloaking device and clearly failed to use it.
Or the part where, had they had an escort and thereby by definition had a scout, they wouldn't have jumped into a gate with several tornados hanging around. It's a valid point, but nothing at all to do with my counterpoint to Falcon saying that people should bring guns.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4960215#post4960215
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4959250#post4959250
Will these do? 'Cause this gank happened on a station, which means that the Tornado was hanging in the breeze for long before the warp in. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1329
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 05:56:00 -
[189] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:[quote=Sentient Blade]You can shoot anyone you want, anytime you want. Your choice to fear the consequences is the cause of your failure, not Mr. Falcon's suggestion.
Because sitting in a station for 15 minutes with GCC unable to undock anything capable of defending something else, just because you fired one salvo to protect yourself is amazing gameplay <3 |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9243
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 06:02:00 -
[190] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote: Because sitting in a station for 15 minutes with GCC unable to undock anything capable of defending something else, just because you fired one salvo to protect yourself is amazing gameplay <3
That sound? That was the sound of the point going over your head.
I'm going to stop replying, because if you're not trolling then you're hopeless. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Paranoid Loyd
1617
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 06:02:00 -
[191] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Sibyyl wrote:[quote=Sentient Blade]You can shoot anyone you want, anytime you want. Your choice to fear the consequences is the cause of your failure, not Mr. Falcon's suggestion. Because sitting in a station for 15 minutes with GCC unable to undock anything capable of defending something else, just because you fired one salvo to protect yourself is amazing gameplay <3
I see you lack imagination, you can't even imagine how good it would feel to countergank a Nado that was trying to kill your 7 bil isk hauler. That 15 minutes would be over before you realized you actually played the game for once. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
367
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 06:04:00 -
[192] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote: Skiffs have gone up and are at the highest price they've ever been. This is directly due to gankers ganking miners.
Citation need.
Orcas are the highest Ive ever seen em. Freighters cost about 20% more than they did less than a year ago. Let's talk about plex prices, are they due to gankers, too? ISK is worth less and less each day, THAT is your culprit here.
Quote: Getting rid of competition for a product is also bad for an economy. I could go into detail but I'll just state it as simple as possible.
Competitive market = good. Monopoly = bad.
Well at least u got that part right.
Either the rules apply to everyone, or they don't justly apply to anyone.
|

Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
367
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 06:05:00 -
[193] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Plus, they are fun.
Welcome to a world where "cut throat business practices" are taken seriously.[/quote]
Sayeth the Machiavellian  Either the rules apply to everyone, or they don't justly apply to anyone.
|

Jarnis McPieksu
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
552
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 06:33:00 -
[194] - Quote
Darkblad wrote:Hauling a total of 7 billion in collateral, with that low market value of the four contracts' contents didn't ring a bell? Think I'll just keep CCP Falcon's post for future quotation, so thanks for this thread, somehow 
Wait, this is about OP getting shot while hauling a 7 bil collateral contract that is actually worth nada inside the wrap?
Heh, you got hauling contract scammed, son. Welcome to EVE.
|

Jarnis McPieksu
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
552
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 06:34:00 -
[195] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:[quote=Sentient Blade]
Edit: Did you know Catalysts are made of paper?
Tissue paper, actually. Slightly wet.
|

Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 07:17:00 -
[196] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  I'd love to see CCP provide protection to people's haulers by logging in in logi ships! That would probably be enough to get me back into ganking. Luukje wrote:Celthric Kanerian wrote:Rule number 357 of EVE: The word safe doesn't have meaning any place in EVE.
... and it was probably CODE who shot you... Bunch of retards... Really? come on look further than that. I deserve more credit for my work than to be compared to a few freighter gankers. atleast check out a killboard before you spread lies! : / dont CODE always gank under their own flag anyway to show the kills on their kb? ;p Good job on these tears man! As for the New Order, not all of us are in CODE. though that is the largest new order alliance.
Tears? I'm merely stating the fact that you are all a bunch of noobish and honorless gankers, regardless of what alliance you belong to. |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6655
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 07:22:00 -
[197] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote: Tears? I'm merely stating the fact that you are all a bunch of noobish and honorless gankers, regardless of what alliance you belong to.
By that logic being ganked by them would make one somewhat more noobish, wouldn't you say?
And honour? I'm sorry what? Since when did that concept figure into EvE? And what worth does it have to consider doing so? "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5376
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 07:49:00 -
[198] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:Tears? I'm merely stating the fact that you are all a bunch of noobish and honorless gankers, regardless of what alliance you belong to.
You know, I communicate almost exclusively in gifs ranging from the moderately on-topic to those ripped from bme-zine, but you've finally stumped me.
The internet doesn't seem familiar with this concept you have of e-honor.
I did find something that I think might be close to your meaning on Oglaf, but I wont (for obvious reasons) link it here (just google 'honor oglaf').
Blood and Thunder indeed. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9245
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 07:53:00 -
[199] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote: Tears? I'm merely stating the fact that you are all a bunch of noobish and honorless gankers, regardless of what alliance you belong to.
You do realize that, whether you put the facade on or not, that we still consider it tears, right? Especially when you mention "honor"? Oh yeah, that's a big indicator of tears. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 09:20:00 -
[200] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:I just want to say a big thank you to those people who did give some positives out of this. As for the macho ego's out there I thank you for wasting your time in this post as it didn't really contribute to anything apart from many http addresses.
It was hard to take a punch below the belt in eve but hey i take it and will only get better to not get another one soon. I love the game thats for sure. I got blown up instantly coming out of cloak whilst at the station in docking range. It sounds like I"m guilty for this action by the sound of some people in this post, amazing.
Anyways thank you and enjoy.
You are, all the info you need on how to avoid this has already been posted multiple times. The fact you did ur haul session to me THREE TIMES in a row makes it just stupid. The first time you got through and managed to dock up; safely having hauled 8.2 bil you deemed urself safe and as soon as i put new contracts up 5 mins later you took those as well; whilst having seen tornado's luring outside a station. (where's ur build in alarm bells?) You take the 2nd batch, and manage to get docked up again while hauling 6.8 bil. Three times a charm right? you go for a third round, this time having 4 contracts for a grand total of 7.09 bil. still those pesky nado's outside? oh well they didnt hurt me right! *blap* ****. Ur own dumb fault and noone else's  |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 09:32:00 -
[201] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  I'd love to see CCP provide protection to people's haulers by logging in in logi ships! That would probably be enough to get me back into ganking. Luukje wrote:Celthric Kanerian wrote:Rule number 357 of EVE: The word safe doesn't have meaning any place in EVE.
... and it was probably CODE who shot you... Bunch of retards... Really? come on look further than that. I deserve more credit for my work than to be compared to a few freighter gankers. atleast check out a killboard before you spread lies! : / dont CODE always gank under their own flag anyway to show the kills on their kb? ;p Good job on these tears man! As for the New Order, not all of us are in CODE. though that is the largest new order alliance. Tears? I'm merely stating the fact that you are all a bunch of noobish and honorless gankers, regardless of what alliance you belong to.
HA, ha, hahahaha. someone's a little butthurt... btw using noobish in the same sentence as our kind of ganking is just stupid; obviously its been setup pretty well and a lot of thought has gone into this kind of gameplay. Same goes for freighter blaps; its not all that easy that you just press f1 and grab loot. I think you've got no clue as to what it takes to pull of these schemes, be it freighter blapping on contract scams. Guess i'll be seeing you on my KB soon?
|

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9112
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 09:52:00 -
[202] - Quote
Well, actually, given enough people ganking freighters isn't hard at all.
But feel free to tell me that I have no clue about this ....... *snickers xD* http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
420
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 09:54:00 -
[203] - Quote
At least you're playing with others. Play ball, or be the ball. A choice we all make when we undock. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 09:55:00 -
[204] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Well, actually, given enough people ganking freighters isn't hard at all.
But feel free to tell me that I have no clue about this ....... *snickers xD*
not saying its hard, hell even JF hunting is 'easy', but it takes more than a few noobs to pull off this stuff. That's why i said its not all that easy; to the point where noobs pull it off on their own.  |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1591
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 09:55:00 -
[205] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
who is lying to you? CCP will not be doign anything about this because this is the CORE of the game! THis game is about risk , reward, PVP and competition.
The game is extremely fun as long as you keep in mind that THOSE are the activities meant to be fun in this game. The others are side activities so you can fund those primary activities.
I would agree that the current state presents too much ganking in high sec (completely blame the removal of the Rof nerf on the destroyers years ago).
But if the guy that killed you used a battleship, then he lost his battleship. It is not a matter of defenseless ship. If someoen is DUMB to not see a trap and is attracted to a specific place I want themto be, I can deal , alongside 1 friend, with ANY subcapital ship in game, even any pirate cruiser.
Guns on miners willl NOT solve anything until you step up and learn to fight. You can already fly in a battleship, or cruiser. Why not do that?
LEarn the game, you got into a trap that probably meant to force you pay a huge penalty for failing in the contract. A penalty that costed more than the ship they needed to kill you. LEarn from that and never get contracts with HUGE colaterals again.
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

Scout Vyvorant
University of Caille Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 10:37:00 -
[206] - Quote
Dear OP, and anyone who thinks like you,
I took the liberty to go and check the kill report on zkillboard, you were flying a poorly fitted Prorator, a blockade runner that should be 99% of the times cloaked, and flying around using instant dock / instant jump bookmark (or even a warp to 0 and spam dock works fine most of time).
From what I understand on the kill report you were probably autopiloting your way to the station, or even if you weren't, you were not using instant dock bookmark.
Your killer didn't use any BS, but a simple Tornado with a targetting speed alt boosting the speed of his targeting.
I'm sorry friend, you don't need any protection from concord, unless for "concord protection" you mean a protection from yourself. You just fell in the most common gank in high sec, and there's only one person to blame, you.
You got Tornadoed, friend. |

Duran Veldspur
Rebel Empire
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 13:49:00 -
[207] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
eve hisec is like chicago, it is a paradise for criminals with guns. ccp , and the empires dont seem to give a crap that such violence is happening in supposedly high security space. as long as gankers are blowing up industrials and mission runners that is what ccp has wanted. but ccp has learned that they lose alot of customers this way so they keep trying to buff hisec security a bit but gankers always find ways to easily get away with ganking.
its just part of the game, get use to it or show ccp what you think with your pocket book... |

Hicksimus
Torgue
278
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 14:38:00 -
[208] - Quote
I think this is all part of a MUCH deeper issue.
Production outpaces destruction by such a wide margin that people can easily undertake such activities. Pretty sure it was Chris Rock that did one on how if bullets were crazy expensive far fewer people would shoot eachother.......the same is the case here.
"I would blow yo ****ing head off if I could afford it!" "Imma get me another job, Imma start saving some money and you a dead man!"
Do you have it? |

Tolkaz Khamsi
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 14:59:00 -
[209] - Quote
Hicksimus wrote:I think this is all part of a MUCH deeper issue.
Production outpaces destruction by such a wide margin that people can easily undertake such activities. Pretty sure it was Chris Rock that did one on how if bullets were crazy expensive far fewer people would shoot eachother.......the same is the case here.
"I would blow yo ****ing head off if I could afford it!" "Imma get me another job, Imma start saving some money and you a dead man!"
The problem here is not hisec or losec; it's nullsec. Not enough big fleet battles where big ships get blowed up. Eve needs a B-R5RB fight every *week*, not every year. Plenty of ships get blowed up in Eve every day, but not enough of those huge, expensive subcaps and capital ships. Get rid of jump bridges and jump freighters if you want to spice up life in null. All of a sudden that trek to Jita from Fountain or Stain starts looking a bit more perilous. |

Kiandoshia
Tetragorn SpaceMonkey's Alliance
1742
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 15:03:00 -
[210] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:high sec is really a joke.
This, essentially. |

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4158
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 15:15:00 -
[211] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Well, actually, given enough people ganking freighters isn't hard at all.
But feel free to tell me that I have no clue about this ....... *snickers xD* not saying its hard, hell even JF hunting is 'easy', but it takes more than a few noobs to pull off this stuff. That's why i said its not all that easy; to the point where noobs pull it off on their own.  Actually, it takes one person to coordinate it and a bunch of people in standard fit ships who can all be noobs. Burn Jita proves this. If you can approach a target and hit F1 when told, you can gank. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7852
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 15:16:00 -
[212] - Quote
Tolkaz Khamsi wrote:Hicksimus wrote:I think this is all part of a MUCH deeper issue.
Production outpaces destruction by such a wide margin that people can easily undertake such activities. Pretty sure it was Chris Rock that did one on how if bullets were crazy expensive far fewer people would shoot eachother.......the same is the case here.
"I would blow yo ****ing head off if I could afford it!" "Imma get me another job, Imma start saving some money and you a dead man!"
The problem here is not hisec or losec; it's nullsec. Not enough big fleet battles where big ships get blowed up. Eve needs a B-R5RB fight every *week*, not every year. Plenty of ships get blowed up in Eve every day, but not enough of those huge, expensive subcaps and capital ships. Get rid of jump bridges and jump freighters if you want to spice up life in null. All of a sudden that trek to Jita from Fountain or Stain starts looking a bit more perilous.
No one would play that game at all, or 'almost' no one. The reason CCP added jump drives and jump bridges was 'to open up null sec for more people' because in the past people complained about how 'having to do logistics in null is painful'.
People look at past null sec through rose colored glasses, they forget how badly it sucked before these 'modern conveniences' like jump drives and upgradeable systems were invented. It's the same way people in real life idolize the past when the truth is the past sucks, people THINK they'd love living in ancient times, till they died because of a wisdom tooth or an infection caused by a paper cut....
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7852
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 15:18:00 -
[213] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Actually, it takes one person to coordinate it and a bunch of people in standard fit ships who can all be noobs. Burn Jita proves this. If you can approach a target and hit F1 when told, you can gank.
Doing the exact same thing, yo can run incursions too.
|

Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
315
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 16:48:00 -
[214] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  CCP Falcon accidentally the whole anti-ganking movement.  Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I want to create content, not become content. |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1594
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 16:51:00 -
[215] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  CCP Falcon accidentally the whole anti-ganking movement. 
not at all. There is a small part of the movment that is reasoanble and do not want gank gone. Just think that the effects of cocnord intervention are too small, sepcially with the cheap gank ships like destroyers. Just that. And analysing that is within a reasonable request level. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 16:54:00 -
[216] - Quote
all i see are tears from high sec carebears who dont know how to protect themselves, you literally do NOT have to lose ur ships to ganks, be it miner or hauler, when you do everything you can to avoid this. miners getting blapped are dumb, coss all you need is a dscan spam to see anythign coming ur way. (and not afk-mine) haulers have plenty of tools too which have nearly all been listed. its the new players or the people who havent learned how to play that get caught by the gankers. if you get ganked; you brought it on urself and you have nothing to rage at but urself. play like theres something hunting you and be that paranoid carebear; coss we are hunting you and will catch you if you dont. |

Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
315
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 16:56:00 -
[217] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:not at all. There is a small part of the movment that is reasoanble and do not want gank gone. Just think that the effects of cocnord intervention are too small, sepcially with the cheap gank ships like destroyers. Just that. And analysing that is within a reasonable request level.
Fair enough
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  CCP Falcon accidentally most of the anti-ganking movement. 
Better? 
Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I want to create content, not become content. |

Arkus Kane
UNN Heavy Industries
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 17:35:00 -
[218] - Quote
When I think of futuristic mining corporations in space, I think of fierce industrial giants that not only rake in obscene money from destroying vast belts of asteroids, but then use that money to purchase and fly powerful, deadly escort ships...or hire others to do that for them.
At least, if/when I ever run an industrial corporation that's going to be my goal: a hefty lump of the profits going towards having a really tough, high tech fleet.
If you've got a TON of money from huge mining ops, that should give you power in terms of the ships you can field too.
But no, for some reason people just want to fly around in Hulks in 1.0 all day without even bothering to think about protecting their mining and hauling tasks...and then whinge about the consequences. |

Elinarien
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 17:40:00 -
[219] - Quote
Luukje wrote:all i see are tears from high sec carebears who dont know how to protect themselves, you literally do NOT have to lose ur ships to ganks, be it miner or hauler, when you do everything you can to avoid this. miners getting blapped are dumb, coss all you need is a dscan spam to see anythign coming ur way. (and not afk-mine) haulers have plenty of tools too which have nearly all been listed. its the new players or the people who havent learned how to play that get caught by the gankers. if you get ganked; you brought it on urself and you have nothing to rage at but urself. play like theres something hunting you and be that paranoid carebear; coss we are hunting you and will catch you if you dont.
Indeed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrlUMiRL1jU |

Tolkaz Khamsi
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 17:42:00 -
[220] - Quote
Arkus Kane wrote:When I think of futuristic mining corporations in space, I think of fierce industrial giants that not only rake in obscene money from destroying vast belts of asteroids, but then use that money to purchase and fly powerful, deadly escort ships...or hire others to do that for them.
At least, if/when I ever run an industrial corporation that's going to be my goal: a hefty lump of the profits going towards having a really tough, high tech fleet.
If you've got a TON of money from huge mining ops, that should give you power in terms of the ships you can field too.
But no, for some reason people just want to fly around in Hulks in 1.0 all day without even bothering to think about protecting their mining and hauling tasks...and then whinge about the consequences.
Back when I was in a mining corp, the problem was finding pilots who were willing to fly CAP for a mining op. If you think mining is boring, try flying CAP for a bunch of miners. We ended up just contracting with some combat pilots who were willing to be batphoned if we came under fire, but that still meant that help could be as much as five minutes or more away if trouble landed.
|

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
890
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 17:42:00 -
[221] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Literally pressing like as hard as I can while throwing money at the screen and celebrating.
FALCON PUNCH
You just accidentally the entire anti-ganking community, sir. What kind of scotch do you prefer, and what address do I mail it to? |

Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5979
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 17:46:00 -
[222] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Sibyyl wrote:[quote=Sentient Blade]You can shoot anyone you want, anytime you want. Your choice to fear the consequences is the cause of your failure, not Mr. Falcon's suggestion. Because sitting in a station for 15 minutes with GCC unable to undock anything capable of defending something else, just because you fired one salvo to protect yourself is amazing gameplay <3
The real issue is Concord. If Concord wasn't there then you wouldn't have this excuse to hide behind. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee & Grammar Gestapo. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5381
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 17:46:00 -
[223] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:not at all. There is a small part of the movment that is reasoanble and do not want gank gone. Just think that the effects of cocnord intervention are too small, sepcially with the cheap gank ships like destroyers. Just that. And analysing that is within a reasonable request level.
CONCORD intervention means: Ship Loss Sec Status Loss 15 minute time out Killright
Regardless of the success or failure of the attack.
That's a pretty big set of effects. And using smaller ships to minimize the effect of the first just magnifies the effects of the last three.
What more do you want? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Unleashed Pestilence
970
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 18:16:00 -
[224] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Literally pressing like as hard as I can while throwing money at the screen and celebrating. FALCON PUNCH You just accidentally the entire anti-ganking community, sir. What kind of scotch do you prefer, and what address do I mail it to? I was delaying my response until I could come up with a good way of expressing how much I agree with Falcon's post. I give up. At least this post gets close. New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |

Tam Althor
Ill Tempered Sea Trout Brothers of Tangra
46
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 18:31:00 -
[225] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1596
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 18:33:00 -
[226] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:not at all. There is a small part of the movment that is reasoanble and do not want gank gone. Just think that the effects of cocnord intervention are too small, sepcially with the cheap gank ships like destroyers. Just that. And analysing that is within a reasonable request level. Fair enough CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  CCP Falcon accidentally most of the anti-ganking movement.  Better? 
I feel pleased with your exacerbation of wisdom and moderation...
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

Natural CloneKiller
Ukranian Hauling Co.
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 19:01:00 -
[227] - Quote
To keep this discussion going for a little bit longer and for the 'FALCON PUNCH' comment making me laugh so much, please accept last weeks instalment:
http://imgur.com/z6s3vu9
This was a picture I took on my phone of SARGE ZONE HAULING SERVICES on his live (4 second delay TWICH stream!!!) He accepted one of our contracts and just so happened to have a live TWITCH stream of the Hauling. We laughed so hard that someone would stream this and listen to Eve Radio + have others watching the stream.
When we started watching his stream he was in a Charon and no the Talos army was not at hand at the time :) but you pick up the story here with him swapping to an Unfitted T1 Hauler! and just dropping our package into its cargo!
When I get some time I will upload the FRAPS of the whole thing. I will let someone else go digging for his stream link as its all there recorded!
My one comment to all of the posts is as follows:
If the haulers dedicated as much time and as much attention to detail as we do then they would be safe. Then we would evolve and adapt. All I ask for from CCP is to continue to give all players gankers or bears the ability to continue to evolve the game we all play. I mean who goes looking for a TWITCH stream for a hauler to see if they can get more intel!!!
Oh and respect the FALCON PUNCH!!!
|

Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1331
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 19:16:00 -
[228] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  ...FALCON PUNCH... FALCON PUNCH
F Would you like to know more? |

Vlademyr
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 19:44:00 -
[229] - Quote
@duchess amarrian Thanks for letting us know everything is working as intended |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2654
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:01:00 -
[230] - Quote
where's that guy with the entitlement saga? that would be a good thing for this thread This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133 |

Jarod Garamonde
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
1913
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:16:00 -
[231] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
Not too long ago, they made it so that CONCORD ECM's the crap out of their targets, the second they arrive on grid. What more do you want? Unarmed ships to be made untargettable? How about you protect yourself and fly smarter? Maybe even with escorts, from now on?
Bounties are not a punishment. We actually like having bounties on us. It's considered a badge of honor amongst pirates, and a nice reward to anyone who kills us in mutual combat. So, rest assured, they ARE enjoying the bounty you put on them.
You're flying a hauler, not a combat ship. CCP isn't going to give you 8 turret slots and enough PG/CPU to fit BShip guns. It makes no sense, and it marginalizes actual combat ships. You think a Holliday Cruise liner or an Exxon oil tanker has 17-inch guns and steel armor plates?
Seriously. Get over yourself. Stab out your ship or fit a tank and learn to fight back. QQ'ing on the forums is just going to get you laughed at AND wardec'd. That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right... |

Jarod Garamonde
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
1913
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:18:00 -
[232] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
This is why we love Falcon. That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right... |

E-2C Hawkeye
State War Academy Caldari State
674
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:29:00 -
[233] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. This may be somewhat accurate but not really true. Even when you fit for tank or min/max mining or hauling it doesnGÇÖt leave room for guns. Should you even fit guns on your hauler/miner it wonGÇÖt stop the gank.
Indy doesnGÇÖt need the ability to fight back with guns, they need the ability to defend or defend better then what they have at the moment.
|

HollyShocker 2inthestink
State War Academy Caldari State
674
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:29:00 -
[234] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. This may be somewhat accurate but not really true. Even when you fit for tank or min/max mining or hauling it doesnGÇÖt leave room for guns. Should you even fit guns on your hauler/miner it wonGÇÖt stop the gank.
Indy doesnGÇÖt need the ability to fight back with guns, they need the ability to defend or defend better then what they have at the moment.
|

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1600
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:30:00 -
[235] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. This may be somewhat accurate but not really true. Even when you fit for tank or min/max mining or hauling it doesnGÇÖt leave room for guns. Should you even fit guns on your hauler/miner it wonGÇÖt stop the gank. Indy doesnGÇÖt need the ability to fight back with guns, they need the ability to defend or defend better then what they have at the moment.
GUNS will not stop the ganking. Why people even think of guns? Even if you were in a fully armed cruiser. Youwould not kill the gankers before concord arrives.
You need to be SMART, MOVE safely, use scouts. Just that.
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

Paranoid Loyd
1629
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:42:00 -
[236] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: GUNS will not stop the ganking. Why people even think of guns? Even if you were in a fully armed cruiser. Youwould not kill the gankers before concord arrives.
You need to be SMART, MOVE safely, use scouts. Just that.
We've already gone over this. You don't engage him while he is shooting the hauler, you engage him before he has a chance to engage the hauler.
"PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5381
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:44:00 -
[237] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. This may be somewhat accurate but not really true. Even when you fit for tank or min/max mining or hauling it doesnGÇÖt leave room for guns. Should you even fit guns on your hauler/miner it wonGÇÖt stop the gank. Indy doesnGÇÖt need the ability to fight back with guns, they need the ability to defend or defend better then what they have at the moment.
A solo hauler can trivially protect himself against a solo ganker with the tools already available.
A hauler needs organized and intelligent help (one character will do in most situations) to protect himself from a large group of gankers.
In other words, the hauler has the advantage in solo encounters and needs far fewer players to have the advantage in group encounters.
Why do haulers need more help? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Hengle Teron
Mew Age Outpaws
72
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 20:48:00 -
[238] - Quote
Hm I thought it would be the ganker thanking CCP for no ultimate carebear protection in highsec  |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:05:00 -
[239] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Being at the keyboard is a fallacy. Doesn't make a difference. Eh, no. What kind of fallacy do you think it is?  And being at the keyboard isn't bad advice either, by the way: it helps you not be there when the ganker arrives. This. You can't Dscan while AFK. Back when I still mined I avoided a couple ganks in my mackinaw due to a healthy dose of paranoia, preparation, and liberal use of the 360 degree dscan. By the time the cats landed on grid all they saw were the receding tail lights of my rocket car.
DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:08:00 -
[240] - Quote
Tam Althor wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens?
Just wanted to add this.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224365/CCP_closes_San_Francisco_offices_lays_off_two_key_executives.php#.U_8ZD1IUtGI.twitter |

Paranoid Loyd
1630
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:11:00 -
[241] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why.
Yes it does. I looked back through your posts and could not find said list maybe you can enlighten us again or at least point to said list. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20499
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:15:00 -
[242] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time.
It's only as useless as the person using it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
77
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:25:00 -
[243] - Quote
Tam Althor wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens?
Wow Tam Althor - you have just stuck a nice big red sticker on your forehead.
|

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
116
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:26:00 -
[244] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time. It's only as useless as the person using it.
To be fair, the people who find targets in highsec are probably the last people he should be telling that he thinks Dscan is pointless. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:32:00 -
[245] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Yes it does. I looked back through your posts and could not find said list maybe you can enlighten us again or at least point to said list.
When it comes to a gank, the ganker already knows you're in belt. The moment they warp in, they are locking you as soon as the game lets them (takes time to come out of warp on grid).
So here is the list.
Keep your ships aligned so that the moment someone tries to lock you, you insta warp. Unfortunately you will eventually move out of range of the rocks so this isn't viable.
You can warp off the moment a potential ganker (just because someone warps in doesn't mean they are a ganker) warps in and hope to warp off before they finish falling out of warp. However, now the gankers don't even have to gank to stop you from mining. They just have to camp belts.
Moving for mining barges and exhumers is pointless. You will still have an alignment time before warping and you won't be able to speed tank their guns. I can see it working for a venture though.
Your best option is to simply go with a tanky setup and hope that they won't bother to gank you if they have to lose more isk than what they will destroy. This falls apart if the ganker doesn't care about isk loss vs isk destroyed.
You can hire protection. Either hire someone to sit in belt with a pvp fit ship or hire mercs to war dec the gankers. Either one will probably cost you more than simply replacing a lost ship. At least if you get ganked you get insurance payout, salvage all the wrecks (yours and the gankers), and loot all the wrecks. If they pod you, you get a kill right and you can now gank them at any time without CONCORD involvement. Also, if the ganker is in an NPC corp, hiring a merc corp won't work.
DScan is meaningless in hi-sec.
So at what point is not being AFK suppose to protect you from being ganked? Sure it helps. You are there to direct drones and possibly pop a few after losing a ship (key phrase, "after being ganked"). You could also get your other ships out while they focus on one. So not being AFK can certainly reduce the number of ships that get ganked (time permitting before CONCORD shows). Odds are, in tanked skiffs, you can be AFK and probably only lose one before CONCORD shows even in a .5 system. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12852
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:33:00 -
[246] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. This may be somewhat accurate but not really true. Even when you fit for tank or min/max mining or hauling it doesnGÇÖt leave room for guns. Should you even fit guns on your hauler/miner it wonGÇÖt stop the gank. Indy doesnGÇÖt need the ability to fight back with guns, they need the ability to defend or defend better then what they have at the moment. GUNS will not stop the ganking. Why people even think of guns? Even if you were in a fully armed cruiser. Youwould not kill the gankers before concord arrives. You need to be SMART, MOVE safely, use scouts. Just that.
All gank boats are profitable to gank. Ironic no? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:34:00 -
[247] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time. It's only as useless as the person using it.
Were talking about the miner using it as protection against gankers. Try to keep up.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12852
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:37:00 -
[248] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time. It's only as useless as the person using it. Were talking about the miner using it as protection against gankers. Try to keep up.
Range of 1 million km and if you pick up a number of cats be sure you are aligned. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5381
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:43:00 -
[249] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Yes it does. I looked back through your posts and could not find said list maybe you can enlighten us again or at least point to said list. When it comes to a gank, the ganker already knows you're in belt. The moment they warp in, they are locking you as soon as the game lets them (takes time to come out of warp on grid). So here is the list. Keep your ships aligned so that the moment someone tries to lock you, you insta warp. Unfortunately you will eventually move out of range of the rocks so this isn't viable. You can warp off the moment a potential ganker (just because someone warps in doesn't mean they are a ganker) warps in and hope to warp off before they finish falling out of warp. However, now the gankers don't even have to gank to stop you from mining. They just have to camp belts. Moving for mining barges and exhumers is pointless. You will still have an alignment time before warping and you won't be able to speed tank their guns. I can see it working for a venture though.
You're not speed tanking their guns tracking, you're speed tanking their range. Blasters don't shoot far, mmkay?
[Mackinaw, Speed tank]
Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot]
Modulated Strip Miner II Modulated Strip Miner II
Medium Ancillary Current Router II Medium Ancillary Current Router II
Alternatively, you can be aligned and nearly not moving (top speed is 17m/s, so set to 13m/s) if you have a friend in fleet with you.
[Mackinaw, Anti-Gank]
Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II
'Langour' Drive Disruptor I 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I
Modulated Strip Miner II Modulated Strip Miner II
Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I Medium Ice Harvester Accelerator I
D-Scan gives you extra protection with both setups. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24175
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:46:00 -
[250] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking. Eh, no. I never said that. In fact, I rather said the exact opposite. Please stop making things up. In particular, stop putting words in my mouth. This was something you said in a moment of confusion about what CONCORD actually did to the behaviour of players.
Angeal MacNova wrote:It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Setting aside for a moment that you're completely wrong about that one, how is it a fallacy? Could you please categorise what type of fallacy it is? If not, could you please stop using the word GÇö it does not mean what you seem to think it means. 
Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time.
It's only as useless as the person using it. Were talking about the miner using it as protection against gankers. Try to keep up. GǪand it's still not pointless in highsec. Again, setting aside the fact that you didn't limit your claim and made a very general (and incorrect) statement so you now have to move the goalposts, dscan helps miners protect against gankers just fine even in highsec. You just have to know how to use it. So Jonah's answer is entirely correct even with your alteration. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20499
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:50:00 -
[251] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time. It's only as useless as the person using it. Were talking about the miner using it as protection against gankers. Try to keep up. I know exactly what we're talking about TYVM, that doesn't change the fact that you stated "DScan is useless" without any qualifiers.
And you're still wrong, DScan has saved my arse more than once while I've been mining, used in conjunction with local, knowing what ships gankers use and setting gankers to red it makes it relatively easy to notice when a group of gankers is inbound. Not being there when they roll up in the belt is a good way to not get ganked.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:51:00 -
[252] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking. Eh, no. I never said that.
Quote:if it wasn't such a deterrent, ganking wouldn't exist. Instead, it would be a wholesale, carefree, and unavoidable slaughter.
My bad. Ganking would even exist. It would simply be wholesale slaughtering.
|

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:52:00 -
[253] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time. It's only as useless as the person using it. Were talking about the miner using it as protection against gankers. Try to keep up. I know exactly what we're talking about TYVM, that doesn't change the fact that you stated "DScan is useless" without any qualifiers. And you're still wrong, DScan has saved my arse more than once while I've been mining, used in conjunction with local and setting gankers to red it makes it relatively easy to notice when a group of gankers is inbound. Not being there when they roll up in the belt is a good way to not get ganked.
Then please explain how a miner using DScan will help protect them from gankers in hi-sec. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20499
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:54:00 -
[254] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Then please explain how a miner using DScan will help protect them from gankers in hi-sec. If you can't figure that out for yourslf, you're beyond help.
Here's a hint, a bunch of catalysts on Dscan are generally up to no good, especially when there's gankers in local, you did set them to red right?
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
77
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:55:00 -
[255] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:
When it comes to a gank, the ganker already knows you're in belt. The moment they warp in, they are locking you as soon as the game lets them (takes time to come out of warp on grid).
So here is the list.
Keep your ships aligned so that the moment someone tries to lock you, you insta warp. Unfortunately you will eventually move out of range of the rocks so this isn't viable. In most systems there are multiple places to be aligned to. Align to point 1 until you reach the edge of your range, then realign to point 2, repeat ad infinitum
You can warp off the moment a potential ganker (just because someone warps in doesn't mean they are a ganker) warps in and hope to warp off before they finish falling out of warp. However, now the gankers don't even have to gank to stop you from mining. They just have to camp belts. If your alt (or friend) is also camping the belt in a hull with jamming bonuses the camping ganker will move on pretty fast
Moving for mining barges and exhumers is pointless. You will still have an alignment time before warping and you won't be able to speed tank their guns. I can see it working for a venture though. Align as per point one and this is no longer an issue
Your best option is to simply go with a tanky setup and hope that they won't bother to gank you if they have to lose more isk than what they will destroy. This falls apart if the ganker doesn't care about isk loss vs isk destroyed. Your tanks value is not based on the isk won vs lost relationship. It is based on the damaged able to absorbed before concord can land on grid and jam the ganker/s relationship
You can hire protection. Either hire someone to sit in belt with a pvp fit ship or hire mercs to war dec the gankers. Either one will probably cost you more than simply replacing a lost ship. At least if you get ganked you get insurance payout, salvage all the wrecks (yours and the gankers), and loot all the wrecks. If they pod you, you get a kill right and you can now gank them at any time without CONCORD involvement. Also, if the ganker is in an NPC corp, hiring a merc corp won't work. If it becomes known that you have a good working relationship with someone who is able to make ganking difficult, a ganking group will look for easier meat, think about the benefits of prevention of the ganking cycle rather then just protection of your hull
DScan is meaningless in hi-sec.I don't know where to begin here. D-Scan is a pretty impressive tool when you know how to use it correctly. Hint D-Scan and Overview are designed to work together.
So at what point is not being AFK suppose to protect you from being ganked? Sure it helps. You are there to direct drones and possibly pop a few after losing a ship (key phrase, "after being ganked"). You could also get your other ships out while they focus on one. So not being AFK can certainly reduce the number of ships that get ganked (time permitting before CONCORD shows). Odds are, in tanked skiffs, you can be AFK and probably only lose one before CONCORD shows even in a .5 system. Being AFK anywhere while undocked removes any argument for defence.
Having watched a few ganks in various systems across empire, I feel safe in saying that most gank crews do not arrive on grid at their optimal but have to move to their optimal before engaging a target, if you are in a barge and 6 catalysts land 12km from you and they have the time to fly to 1500m and then engage you before you warp off, you are neglecting your own self preservation. |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7884
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:55:00 -
[256] - Quote
This is what you posted:
RubyPorto wrote:
You're not speed tanking their guns tracking, you're speed tanking their range. Blasters don't shoot far, mmkay?
[Mackinaw, Speed tank]
Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot]
Modulated Strip Miner II Modulated Strip Miner II
Medium Ancillary Current Router II Medium Ancillary Current Router II
Alternatively, you can be aligned and nearly not moving (top speed is 17m/s, so set to 13m/s) if you have a friend in fleet with you.
[Mackinaw, Anti-Gank]
Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II
'Langour' Drive Disruptor I 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I
Modulated Strip Miner II Modulated Strip Miner II
Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I Medium Ice Harvester Accelerator I
D-Scan gives you extra protection with both setups.
This is what they heard:
RubyPorto wrote: Blerg Blerg Blah effort blerg not 100% safety so why bother blah thinking blah effort blerg effort
These people don't want solutions (especially ones that make them do things and stuff), they want FIXES. You offered sandbox, they will only accept themepark. |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7885
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 21:58:00 -
[257] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking.
It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why. Tell that to all the people that use DScan to find potential targets, in highsec, all of the time. It's only as useless as the person using it. Were talking about the miner using it as protection against gankers. Try to keep up. I know exactly what we're talking about TYVM, that doesn't change the fact that you stated "DScan is useless" without any qualifiers. And you're still wrong, DScan has saved my arse more than once while I've been mining, used in conjunction with local and setting gankers to red it makes it relatively easy to notice when a group of gankers is inbound. Not being there when they roll up in the belt is a good way to not get ganked. Then please explain how a miner using DScan will help protect them from gankers in hi-sec.
By alerting them to the impending presance of gank ships. Of course the miner must actually be at the keyboard.
I don't get it, I see you in this thread and others and anything to lloks like actually playing the game is something you rail against. Do you want CCP to play the game for you? |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24176
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:02:00 -
[258] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Keep your ships aligned so that the moment someone tries to lock you, you insta warp. Unfortunately you will eventually move out of range of the rocks so this isn't viable. GǪexcept that it's entirely viable since there's nothing that requires you to mine the same rock for 45 minutes. Belts are large enough to let you keep going and never run out of range to the rocks. And that's before we even go into the various tricks that lowers your align speedGǪ
Quote:You can warp off the moment a potential ganker (just because someone warps in doesn't mean they are a ganker) warps in and hope to warp off before they finish falling out of warp. However, now the gankers don't even have to gank to stop you from mining. They just have to camp belts. GǪwhich doesn't stop you from mining. If they camp a belt, it means that you are now completely free to mine your head off since the gankers are occupied doing nothing.
Quote:Moving for mining barges and exhumers is pointless. You will still have an alignment time before warping and you won't be able to speed tank their guns. Moving means that you have no alignment time, and as others have pointed out you are not moving to speed tank GÇö merely suggesting that it is means you haven't really thought about what's going on.
Quote:Your best option is to simply go with a tanky setup and hope that they won't bother to gank you if they have to lose more isk than what they will destroy. This falls apart if the ganker doesn't care about isk loss vs isk destroyed. In other words, it works brilliantly and the only conclusion that can be drawn from how many don't do it isGǪ well, not fit for printing because it would be such a hugely bigoted and insulting thing to say about miners as a group.
Quote:You can hire protection. Either hire someone to sit in belt with a pvp fit ship or hire mercs to war dec the gankers. Either one will probably cost you more than simply replacing a lost ship. At least if you get ganked you get insurance payout, salvage all the wrecks (yours and the gankers), and loot all the wrecks. If they pod you, you get a kill right and you can now gank them at any time without CONCORD involvement. Also, if the ganker is in an NPC corp, hiring a merc corp won't work. Being in an NPC corp isn't an impediment GÇö the gankers themselves prove this. And while it may or may not be cost efficient to hire guards, the simple fact remains that they work. If you are hell-bent on staying alive, they are the ultimate answer.
Oh, and as mentioned, dscan does suddenly go inoperable in highsec GÇö it works as a protection method there the same as everywhere else. So the point of not being AFK is that it lets you detect and evade gankers before they've even had a chance to shoot you. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20500
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:04:00 -
[259] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:By alerting them to the impending presance of gank ships. Of course the miner must actually be at the keyboard.
I don't get it, I see you in this thread and others and anything to lloks like actually playing the game is something you rail against. Do you want CCP to play the game for you? TBH bots are better players than people like him, at least they tend to safe up when reds appear in local.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5981
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:07:00 -
[260] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:So here is the list.
Keep your ships aligned so that the moment someone tries to lock you, you insta warp. Unfortunately you will eventually move out of range of the rocks so this isn't viable.
Have safe spots bookmarked so you can always stay in range on the rocks. It's not hard.
Angeal MacNova wrote:You can warp off the moment a potential ganker (just because someone warps in doesn't mean they are a ganker) warps in and hope to warp off before they finish falling out of warp. However, now the gankers don't even have to gank to stop you from mining. They just have to camp belts.
Gankers don't just sit in belts to stop you from mining. They want kill which they aren't going to get if they just sit around.
Angeal MacNova wrote:
DScan is meaningless in hi-sec.
Pfft, haha, no.
Angeal MacNova wrote:So at what point is not being AFK suppose to protect you from being ganked?
Directional Scanner & being aligned is your friend. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee & Grammar Gestapo. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9290
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:07:00 -
[261] - Quote
To the guy saying "D-scan is useless in highsec".
It is a fairly common tactic to sit in a pod, next to a Tornado, just slightly off grid from a gate that is being watched on the other side. If you're flying that much freaking money, the scout you should have would notice the Tornado or two on short scan. At which point it's time to take a look around before you take that gate.
D-scan is useful in every area of space, don't talk about **** if you don't even know how it's used. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:36:00 -
[262] - Quote
There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. |

Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5982
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:41:00 -
[263] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor.
This guy has it all figured out, but what is it that he has figured out? Certainly not suicide ganking. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee & Grammar Gestapo. |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:42:00 -
[264] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor.
If the game is so saturated with isk why mine? certainly not to make isk...
|

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9143
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:44:00 -
[265] - Quote
Cancel Align NOW wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. If the game is so saturated with isk why mine? certainly not to make isk... You fail at logic.
People mine afk to make ISK while doing other things.
People either do not want to play to make ISK, or do not want to put effort into it to make ISK, or they lack time to actively play to make ISK.
Is it really that hard? -.-
http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5983
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:47:00 -
[266] - Quote
Miners are literally space bums. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee & Grammar Gestapo. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
116
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:51:00 -
[267] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Miners are literally space bums.
I prefer the term "urban outdoorsman". Makes me sound active. |

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9144
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:52:00 -
[268] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Miners are literally space bums. I prefer the term "urban outdoorsman". Makes me sound active. And is a lie. http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20504
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:53:00 -
[269] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:So here is the list. Keep your ships aligned so that the moment someone tries to lock you, you insta warp. Unfortunately you will eventually move out of range of the rocks so this isn't viable. Have safe spots bookmarked so you can always stay in range on the rocks. It's not hard. Angeal MacNova wrote:You can warp off the moment a potential ganker (just because someone warps in doesn't mean they are a ganker) warps in and hope to warp off before they finish falling out of warp. However, now the gankers don't even have to gank to stop you from mining. They just have to camp belts. Gankers don't just sit in belts to stop you from mining. They want kill which they aren't going to get if they just sit around. Angeal MacNova wrote:DScan is meaningless in hi-sec. Pfft, haha, no. Angeal MacNova wrote:So at what point is not being AFK suppose to protect you from being ganked? Directional Scanner & being aligned is your friend. QFT
Fortunately for gankers, some players consider taking any steps at all to protect their space-canoes is entirely too much effort.
Unfortunately for the rest of us, the effort they should have expended in protecting their ships is channelled into whining on the forums about how unfair it is that they get ganked because of their ingame apathy and incompetence.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
116
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 22:54:00 -
[270] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Miners are literally space bums. I prefer the term "urban outdoorsman". Makes me sound active. And is a lie.
I'm ok with lying to myself. I'm the only one who believes me anyway  |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 23:10:00 -
[271] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Cancel Align NOW wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. If the game is so saturated with isk why mine? certainly not to make isk... You fail at logic. People mine afk to make ISK while doing other things. People either do not want to play to make ISK, or do not want to put effort into it to make ISK, or they lack time to actively play to make ISK. Is it really that hard? -.-
This thread is about the lack of defences available to high sec pilots. CCP Falcon has responded saying use the defences available. Syn Shi attempts to derail the thread (probably unintentionally) by repeating an oft heard argument that ganking is easy because of unlimited isk in game. I mock him. You attempt to defend AFK isk making in a thread about about the defences available to high sec miners and haulers. You claim I fail at logic. Context is useful.
If anyone wants to play Eve Online AFK that is their prerogative,with the views put forward in this very thread by CCP Falcon, I think there will be little on offer to help bolster their defences. As far as I am concerned - if you do anything AFK in Eve Online you are solely responsible for what happens to your hull, it's fittings and your pod. |

Zero Sum Gain
FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOM Silent Requiem
98
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 23:35:00 -
[272] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Miners are literally space bums.
Clearly you haven't seen the movie There Will Be Blood. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 23:35:00 -
[273] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪexcept that it's entirely viable since there's nothing that requires you to mine the same rock for 45 minutes. Belts are large enough to let you keep going and never run out of range to the rocks. And that's before we even go into the various tricks that lowers your align speedGǪ
Except that to insta warp you need to be aligned and up to 3/4 speed. You'll be out of range of the rocks in 5 minutes tops.
WRT the underlined, it's blatantly clear you've never mined in hi-sec.
Quote:GǪwhich doesn't stop you from mining. If they camp a belt, it means that you are now completely free to mine your head off since the gankers are occupied doing nothing.
Oh wow, I was going to reply to each one until this statement. The sheer level of stupidity that your statement has is incomprehensible.
So I'll move on to other posters.
Let's see, there is the "it would be lost on you" comment. That simply translates into "I haven't a clue myself so I can't explain it to you".
The point is you don't know a gank is coming until they are landing on grid and by then it's too late. Miners are already doing the best option available. Tanked out skiffs. It has even resulted in a few "nerf skiffs" whine threads. If using D-scan kept miners from being ganked, then there wouldn't be a need to run skiff fleets. They would simply use hulk fleets and rely on D-scan.
You can say D-scan all you want but until you can explain it's use and how it prevents you from being ganked while mining in hi-sec, D-scan is evidently useless (I say "evidently" due to the fact that if it was as useful as claimed, see comment above about the lack of hulk fleets using D-scan). |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 23:36:00 -
[274] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Miners are literally space bums. Clearly you haven't seen the movie There Will Be Blood.
How about hobo with a shotgun
|

Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 23:48:00 -
[275] - Quote
Cancel Align NOW wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Cancel Align NOW wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. If the game is so saturated with isk why mine? certainly not to make isk... You fail at logic. People mine afk to make ISK while doing other things. People either do not want to play to make ISK, or do not want to put effort into it to make ISK, or they lack time to actively play to make ISK. Is it really that hard? -.- This thread is about the lack of defences available to high sec pilots. CCP Falcon has responded saying use the defences available. Syn Shi attempts to derail the thread (probably unintentionally) by repeating an oft heard argument that ganking is easy because of unlimited isk in game. I mock him. You attempt to defend AFK isk making in a thread about about the defences available to high sec miners and haulers. You claim I fail at logic. Context is useful. If anyone wants to play Eve Online AFK that is their prerogative,with the views put forward in this very thread by CCP Falcon, I think there will be little on offer to help bolster their defences. As far as I am concerned - if you do anything AFK in Eve Online you are solely responsible for what happens to your hull, it's fittings and your pod.
Never once mentioned afk mining...but if it makes you feel better feel free to make stuff up I said.
My post was nothing more than stating a fact. Its easy and cheap to gank there. So what if Concord shows up. Just buy another ship.
Oh ya, just hire somebody to protect you......derp. If that was a viable option it would be happening...guess what...it doesn't.
Just replace the ship. Ships are easy to come by.
Want to add risk back in, reduce the access to ships. Then someone may think twice about doing something if they will have a hard time replacing it. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24177
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:05:00 -
[276] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Except that to insta warp you need to be aligned and up to 3/4 speed. You'll be out of range of the rocks in 5 minutes tops. Have you triedGǪ you knowGǪ attaching mining lasers of some kind rather than just lean out of the window and use a hammer and chisel? Those lasers will give you a 30km zone of activity around any rock. The belt as a whole has a an operative range of ~150km. Even if you do nothing to lower your max speed, that's 30 minutes of uninterrupted mining right there, and then we come to the fact that you can trivially have a setup where you travel at ~33m/s and still be aligned. Having mined in highsec, I know this works because I have actually tried it rather than dismissed it out of hand due to a desperate ignorance of game mechanics.
WRT the underlined, it's blatantly clear that you don't understand how warping works. It's entirely redundant; the one directly implies the other.
Quote:Oh wow, I was going to reply to each one until this statement. The sheer level of stupidity that your statement has is incomprehensible. You don't understand that if the miners are camping a belt, they are in that belt? Are you sure you want to go with that sheer level of stupidity? Congratulations. You have just earned a life-time disqualification from discussing anything EVE related because you are so utterly and completely unfamiliar with the game that you don't even understand that you cannot be in two places at once! GTFO. 
Quote:The point is you don't know a gank is coming until they are landing on grid and by then it's too late. No, the point is that if you don't look, you don't know a gank is coming. You can look, you knowGǪ dscan helps you with the GÇ£lookingGÇ¥ part of the equation, and it lets you see things long before they arrive on grid GÇö it's kind of the whole point of dscan. Again, your ignorance of all things EVE is tripping you up here.
Quote:Miners are already doing the best option available. Apparently not, since they keep thinking that they need more tools at their disposal without even making use of the ones they already have. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:05:00 -
[277] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:
Never once mentioned afk mining...but if it makes you feel better feel free to make stuff up I said.
My post was nothing more than stating a fact. Its easy and cheap to gank there. So what if Concord shows up. Just buy another ship.
Oh ya, just hire somebody to protect you......derp. If that was a viable option it would be happening...guess what...it doesn't.
Just replace the ship. Ships are easy to come by.
Want to add risk back in, reduce the access to ships. Then someone may think twice about doing something if they will have a hard time replacing it.
Seriously though. Don't you just love how these people throw in all kinds of suggestions for miners to "avoid ganking" and then say that miners are stupid for not following their advice.
It never once clued in to them that miners have tried their advice and guess what? It didn't work.
Miners are already doing the best option available to them. Fleets of tanked out skiffs. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20509
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:07:00 -
[278] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Tippia wrote:GǪexcept that it's entirely viable since there's nothing that requires you to mine the same rock for 45 minutes. Belts are large enough to let you keep going and never run out of range to the rocks. And that's before we even go into the various tricks that lowers your align speedGǪ Except that to insta warp you need to be aligned and up to 3/4 speed. You'll be out of range of the rocks in 5 minutes tops. WRT the underlined, it's blatantly clear you've never mined in hi-sec. Quote:Tippia wrote:GǪwhich doesn't stop you from mining. If they camp a belt, it means that you are now completely free to mine your head off since the gankers are occupied doing nothing. Oh wow, I was going to reply to each one until this statement. The sheer level of stupidity that your statement has is incomprehensible. Your ignorance is astounding, it's pretty easy to mine and be aligned, and moving at a speed that'll get you into warp quickly. It's called aligning to bookmarks and celestials, and switching between them when you're getting close to being out of range of whatever you're mining. If you have friends in the belt with you, use webs to reduce the speed required to get into warp. RubyPorto even provided a Mackinaw fit that does exactly that for others.
If gankers camp a belt, which they don't, you mine elsewhere... Simples. The only person showing incomprehensible stupidity is you.
Quote:The point is you don't know a gank is coming until they are landing on grid and by then it's too late. Miners are already doing the best option available. Tanked out skiffs. It has even resulted in a few "nerf skiffs" whine threads. If using D-scan kept miners from being ganked, then there wouldn't be a need to run skiff fleets. They would simply use hulk fleets and rely on D-scan.
You can say D-scan all you want but until you can explain it's use and how it prevents you from being ganked while mining in hi-sec, D-scan is evidently useless (I say "evidently" due to the fact that if it was as useful as claimed, see comment above about the lack of hulk fleets using D-scan). Several posters, many of whom know a great deal more about game mechanics, and ganking, than yourself have explained, in detail, how you can use DScan and other tools such as local and standings to mitigate the risk of being ganked.
With reference to hulks, to be blunt they're shite without Orca Support, they're also expensive and look great on killboards. The current increase in the use of Skiffs is because people can't be arsed to use and act upon the information that is available to them, The current thinking appears to be "a Skiff is hard to kill, why bother with DScan"
Edit ~ With reference to the above post. I mine, it's a necessary evil sometimes, I've never been ganked while doing so. The reason I've never been ganked is because I do use DScan, I do use the standings mechanics, I do watch local, I do know who the gankers are, and I'm usually disappearing into the distance, or already gone when the gankers show up at my location.
TL;DR I actually make an effort to avoid being ganked.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:28:00 -
[279] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Except that to insta warp you need to be aligned and up to 3/4 speed. You'll be out of range of the rocks in 5 minutes tops. Have you triedGǪ you knowGǪ attaching mining lasers of some kind rather than just lean out of the window and use a hammer and chisel? Those lasers will give you a 30km zone of activity around any rock. The belt as a whole has a an operative range of ~150km. Even if you do nothing to lower your max speed, that's 30 minutes of uninterrupted mining right there, and then we come to the fact that you can trivially have a setup where you travel at ~33m/s and still be aligned. Having mined in highsec, I know this works because I have actually tried it rather than dismissed it out of hand due to a desperate ignorance of game mechanics. WRT the underlined, it's blatantly clear that you don't understand how warping works. It's entirely redundant; the one directly implies the other.
What you propose would require too many things and it still wouldn't be as effective as what miners do now. Tanked skiffs.
1. Your alignment would have to take you across the belt. Doable with a safe spot because you won't always have something to warp to that will take you across the belt.
2. You will have to be constantly switching from rock to rock. You compare strip miner range to the belt as a whole when you should be comparing it to individual rocks.
3. Because you will not be in range to mine each rock before they get out of range, you'll have to turn round. You'd be lucky to do this in 2 runs meaning you would need two bookmarks (one for each direction) which isn't hard but a competent ganker will warp in as you turn around meaning you won't be aligned to either bookmark.
Also, why isn't it that you see mining fleets doing this? Because it doesn't work. If it worked, then you would see hulk fleets doing this instead of skiff fleets not doing this. So go ahead and tell me all about how you've done this marvelous "defense" with great success. 
Quote:You don't understand that if the miners are camping a belt, they are in that belt? Are you sure you want to go with that sheer level of stupidity? Congratulations. You have just earned a life-time disqualification from discussing anything EVE related because you are so utterly and completely unfamiliar with the game that you don't even understand that you cannot be in two places at once! GTFO. 
See comment below.
Quote:No, the point is that if you don't look, you don't know a gank is coming. You can look, you knowGǪ dscan helps you with the GÇ£lookingGÇ¥ part of the equation, and it lets you see things long before they arrive on grid GÇö it's kind of the whole point of dscan. Again, your ignorance of all things EVE is tripping you up here.
Look at what? All the neutrals within 14 au in hi-sec? I've yet to see anyone explain the use of d-scan as a way of catching gankers before they land on grid. Someone ganks you so you mark them red. Great, you know when a ganker is in system. They'll also show up on overview but by then it's too late. D-scan only tells you ship name (which can be anything and can be changed) and ship class (which doesn't equate to ganker). So how do you identify a ganker on D-scan?
Quote:Apparently not, since they keep thinking that they need more tools at their disposal without even making use of the ones they already have.
It's called they are doing the best option available but even the best option doesn't stop ganking completely and that's what they are looking for. I was able to grasp that simple concept and yet you couldn't. Clearly the ignorant one is you. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
172
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:31:00 -
[280] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Several posters, many of whom know a great deal more about game mechanics, and ganking, than yourself have explained, in detail, how you can use DScan
Sorry but, use D-scanner and watch for gankers isn't an explanation at all. How do you recognize a ganker on d-scan in hi-sec?
|

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:31:00 -
[281] - Quote
Quote:
Syn Shi attempts to derail the thread (probably unintentionally) by repeating an oft heard argument that ganking is easy because of unlimited isk in game. I mock him.
Syn Shi wrote:
Never once mentioned afk mining...but if it makes you feel better feel free to make stuff up I said.
Reading comprehension. I never said you said anything about AFK mining....
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24179
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:39:00 -
[282] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:What you propose would require too many things No, it really doesn't. It just requires you to be at your keyboard and to use your head a little.
Quote:Also, why isn't it that you see mining fleets doing this? Because it's not actually necessary. Ganking is laughably rare and on the off chance that it would happen, you can just write it off as a business expense and go about your business.
Quote:Look at what? All the neutrals within 14 au in hi-sec? Like I said: you are not qualified to discuss EVE because you are unfamiliar with how the game actually works. You are talking about things in away that makes it blatantly obvious that you are spouting hearsay and second-hand accounts about how they (maybe, occasionally) work GÇö you haven't actually used them yourself.
You look at the list of ship and compare with what right around you. This has been explained to you but again, your unfamiliarity with the game means you are not actually able to process what's being said. Instead, you just kept going and are now of the incorrect belief that no-one has explained how to use the cornucopia of tools the game affords you.
Quote:It's called they are doing the best option available but even the best option doesn't stop ganking completely. Then it is very clearly not the best option available, since using the best option pretty much guarantees safety from ganking. vOv
But I suppose that what you're really saying here is that they're just a bunch of cry-babies since they are demanding something that GÇ£stops ganking completelyGÇ¥, which is such an idiotic demand that it beggars belief.
Oh, and since you didn't comment on it, I also suppose that you managed to figure out why gankers camping a belt is jackpot for the minersGǪ? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
426
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:39:00 -
[283] - Quote
*raises hand* Example: You are mining alone in your belt, happily munching away at hapless asteroids. You have your Dscan set to, oh, I dunno... just short of the distance to the next belt. Anything that is NOT a mining barge appears on it, you assume it means you harm and move. Suspect even another barge... it might be there to provide a warpin for others.
You don't have to nom every rock til 'teh asteroid is defeated'. If you plot a course across the belt and pretarget the juicies as you approach them you can get a few cycles in on each of them as you pass. Also because you're already moving and pointed at where your GTFO point is you can already be in the process of warping away before anything scary finishes landing on grid.
The people who are telling you this works are doing so because it has worked for them in the past to avoid being ganked. It's worked for me. Heck, it's worked for people I was trying to kill... they were paying more attention to Dscan than I was and instead of landing in a mission pocket with a preoccupied shiny battleship I found myself landing alone in a pocket full of pissed off elite frigates and surly looking gurista battleships. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
118
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:42:00 -
[284] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:
Look at what? All the neutrals within 14 au in hi-sec? I've yet to see anyone explain the use of d-scan as a way of catching gankers before they land on grid. Someone ganks you so you mark them red. Great, you know when a ganker is in system. They'll also show up on overview but by then it's too late. D-scan only tells you ship name (which can be anything and can be changed) and ship class (which doesn't equate to ganker). So how do you identify a ganker on D-scan?
........................
....................................................
.......................................................................
............................................................................................................
.....What the hell did I just read? |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24179
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:44:00 -
[285] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:What the hell did I just read? An account of how to use dscan to find something speicif from someone who has never tried to use dscan to find something specific.  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2656
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:48:00 -
[286] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Miners are literally space bums. Clearly you haven't seen the movie There Will Be Blood.
pretty sure miners are worse than that guy This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133 |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20511
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:48:00 -
[287] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote: What you propose would require too many things and it still wouldn't be as effective as what miners do now. Tanked skiffs.
1. Your alignment would have to take you across the belt. Doable with a safe spot because you won't always have something to warp to that will take you across the belt.
Celestial Objects and bookmarks. Prior planning prevents pshhh poor performance.
Quote:2. You will have to be constantly switching from rock to rock. You compare strip miner range to the belt as a whole when you should be comparing it to individual rocks.
3. Because you will not be in range to mine each rock before they get out of range, you'll have to turn round. You'd be lucky to do this in 2 runs meaning you would need two bookmarks (one for each direction) which isn't hard but a competent ganker will warp in as you turn around meaning you won't be aligned to either bookmark. A Mackinaw travels at approx 100m/s, it takes around 4.5 minutes to cover 30KM, more than enough time to get a full cycle in and either switch to the next rock or appropriate celestial/bookmark.
Quote:Also, why isn't it that you see mining fleets doing this? Because it doesn't work. If it worked, then you would see hulk fleets doing this instead of skiff fleets not doing this. So go ahead and tell me all about how you've done this marvelous "defense" with great success.  It does work, but it's not really needed unless you've pissed off the wrong people.
Quote:Look at what? All the neutrals within 14 au in hi-sec? I've yet to see anyone explain the use of d-scan as a way of catching gankers before they land on grid. Someone ganks you so you mark them red. Great, you know when a ganker is in system. They'll also show up on overview but by then it's too late. D-scan only tells you ship name (which can be anything and can be changed) and ship class (which doesn't equate to ganker). So how do you identify a ganker on D-scan? He'll generally be flying a Catalyst, there's usually a few of them and I doubt most gankers bother to change the default ship name of a ship whose lifespan can be measured in seconds, even if they do it'll be probably be something obvious like Tear Collector, or Permit Inspector.
Quote:Sorry but, use D-scanner and watch for gankers isn't an explanation at all. How do you recognize a ganker on d-scan in hi-sec? If you're mining, and there are gankers in local, if there's a Catalyst within 1M KM of you, there's a pretty good chance he's a ganker, if there's more than one Catalyst within 1M KM of you then they're almost certainly gankers.
It's not hard.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1042
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:52:00 -
[288] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. The typical EvE illogical response.
"You can have big guns like then". Not always. Anyone that has been playing longer than you has the opportunity to have better skills and better equipment than you and can always maintain this advantage until you reach all fives. Great advice telling someone to fight fire with a match when the other guy has a flamethrower.
And there is a fine line between "another guy just having fun" and "intentionally causing misery to others". Bullies enjoy bullying people. But hey let's let them off the hook because they get pleasure from their sadistic tendencies.
It doesn't have to be personal to have a negative effect on someone.
To the OP, you have just been the butt of CCPs cruel joke. Most other games try to separate players by rank or playstyle. CCP wants you to think that they do, but in fact they pretty much throw you to the wolves then laugh at posts like this. This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7895
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:53:00 -
[289] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Several posters, many of whom know a great deal more about game mechanics, and ganking, than yourself have explained, in detail, how you can use DScan Sorry but, use D-scanner and watch for gankers isn't an explanation at all. How do you recognize a ganker on d-scan in hi-sec?
This looks like one of those facepalm moments.
But it's typical. High Sec is safe so it doesn't really encourage players to actually learn how to use tools the game gives. In low, null and WH space, your survival tends to revovle around yoru ability to use those tools and be aware, but for most people in high sec you don't even have to have local up.
You're honestly arguing with people about someting without be well versed in the thing being argued lol. Epic. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9296
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:55:00 -
[290] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote: It's called they are doing the best option available but even the best option doesn't stop ganking completely and that's what they are looking for.
No, what they are looking for is as little effort as possible.
That's why they won't do the one thing that guarantees them complete safety, paying attention. Because paying attention requires more effort than zero. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:57:00 -
[291] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Several posters, many of whom know a great deal more about game mechanics, and ganking, than yourself have explained, in detail, how you can use DScan Sorry but, use D-scanner and watch for gankers isn't an explanation at all. How do you recognize a ganker on d-scan in hi-sec?
1. Look up zkillboard (or any other board) and look for losses in the shiptype you wish to fly. Identify the most common ship types used in the game to gank the ship type you wish to fly.
2. In game go to overview settings and make an overview that only shows a. The top 10 ship types used to gank the hull you wish to fly. b. The stations c. The gates
3. Lets call this Simple defense #1.
4. TAB to this overview while in belt mining.
5. Open Dscan. Select use active overview for Dscan. Set angle for scan 360 degrees. Set distance at longest possible distance where no stations or gates show on dscan.
6. Hit Dscan. Once every 30-40 seconds and every time the number of pilots in local changes (yes I know that might mean every 5-6 seconds). If any of those ship types show up on dscan its time to align and prepare to warp out.
7. If a ship type shows up on dscan do not warp immediately, wait until they land on grid.
7a. If they land at/close to optimal for the common fit type used by gankers to kill your ship type, spam warp immediately.
7b. If they land close to another pilot get ready to activate your drones.
8. Add pilot to contact list and set corp/alliance -10.
9. Add pilot and all other corp mates in system to your watchlist.
10. If they were successful in ganking another pilot in the same belt, return to belt and mine happily with your concord insta support.
11. If concord insta support disappears while pilot/corp/alliance are in system. Align and repeat steps 7 on.
Once comfortable using Dscan like this you can start to change attributes.
11a. Change dscan distance range to include one station reduce angle to 30 degrees and scan. If you see a number of the specific shiptypes in scan you now know where they are coming from. There is a high chance they have an office in that station.
11b. When local numbers change, alter scan range and angle to pick up only one gate - scan 5 times over 30 seconds. Again if shiptypes show up you now know where they are coming from.
11c. When good at altering ranges and angles you can: scan gate 1. alter scan gate 2. alter scan gate 3 alter scan gate 1 alter.... |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9297
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 00:59:00 -
[292] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote: And there is a fine line between "another guy just having fun" and "intentionally causing misery to others". Bullies enjoy bullying people. But hey let's let them off the hook because they get pleasure from their sadistic tendencies.
There is no line at all, no distinction, because this is acceptable.
PvP'ing in a PvP game is not "bullying", no matter how you want to redefine the terms to favor you. It is not "bullying" if I shoot someone in Battlefield. In fact, if they suck and don't keep cover, it's not "bullying" if I shoot them a bunch of times, because they don't get the point yet.
It is not "bullying" if I take your money when you land on a hotel in Monopoly.
In fact, it's the entire point of the game.
You just seem to want to play the not by it's own actual rules, but by the rules as you think they should be.
That's called being delusional. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
1042
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:00:00 -
[293] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:[quote=Angeal MacNova]
It's not hard.
So what is it Jonah? Is EvE a hard game or is it not hard? You just had to write a novel on how easy things are. Does that seem a tad ironic?
If Monopoly came with an encyclopedia of rules not many people would play it.
This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
|

CCP Falcon
8537

|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:04:00 -
[294] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote:Duchess Amarrian wrote:high sec is really a joke. This, essentially.
Being unprepared and putting all your eggs in one basket to make a nice juicy target for a suicide gank is the joke here, not highsec.
There are a multitude of ways to protect yourself from suicide gankers, people just automatically assume they're "safe" in highsec, then get annoyed when they lose a ship because of their own lack of spatial awareness.
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20511
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:06:00 -
[295] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:But it's typical. High Sec is safe so it doesn't really encourage players to actually learn how to use tools the game gives. In low, null and WH space, your survival tends to revovle around yoru ability to use those tools and be aware, but for most people in high sec you don't even have to have local up.
QFT I was living in wormholes within 2 months of starting Eve, paranoia is most definitely a survival trait, I still spam DScan even though I now live in highsec. Having local narrow in width but full screen height and locked to the right of my screen is also a leftover from those days, nullsec statics are fun.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Sidrat Flush
Deadly Harmony
190
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:07:00 -
[296] - Quote
Perhaps it could be the time to find an active corporation that will actually help you to play and enjoy Eve. Try null sec. Mining in null sec with active players, intel channels and a whole range of different options if you have the will to try something other than mining should be more than willing to take on a player willing to learn, eager to enjoy the game and new faces are always welcome in decent corporations.
If you don't want to PvP that might be okay too, especially in an industry heavy corporation/alliance, however it's not difficult and in many null alliances/coalitions PvP can be affordable or down right profitable.
The point is, play with people and listen to advice given to you by people with the most recent experiences, as this game changes fast. The best players keep up with the changes and actively teach/write down what's changed, why it's changed and how to get the most out of those changes.
Never stand still in Eve, you will get left behind.
Get a microphone/headset - scan the recruitment thread. Look at the ingame recruitment adverts. Get on their comms and try and get a feel for their entire corporation. It's not necessarily what they can do for you, but whether or not you're going to actually enjoy and look forward to logging in when you can, between your real life commitments.
Use the tools available to you, if you don't know what those tools are, ask questions, listen to the answers. Practice those methods - see if they work for you, tweak them so they DO work for you.
Or you're just filling up bingo squares, trolling the forums and congrats you've got 15 pages.
Its time to stand up against the bad empire based CEO telling falsehoods about what new characters can accomplish and pushing them towards an in game experience of drudgery and loneliness keeping them in the shadow of ignorance for at nest their own profit at worse apathy towards all the experiences that Eve has to offer. |

Paranoid Loyd
1637
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:07:00 -
[297] - Quote
INB4 whiners nitpick Falcon's latest post instead of trying to understand what he is saying.  "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
119
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:08:00 -
[298] - Quote
Cancel Align NOW wrote: All kinds of gospel
Gospel, I say. |
|

CCP Falcon
8545

|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:12:00 -
[299] - Quote
Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens?
I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now.
Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that.
Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on.
That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas.
EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe.
Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight 
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:13:00 -
[300] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote:Duchess Amarrian wrote:High sec is not safe. Fly accordingly. This, essentially.
Fixed. |

Sidrat Flush
Deadly Harmony
190
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:14:00 -
[301] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:[quote=Angeal MacNova]
It's not hard. So what is it Jonah? Is EvE a hard game or is it not hard? You just had to write a novel on how easy things are. Does that seem a tad ironic? If Monopoly came with an encyclopedia of rules not many people would play it.
Basic rules of Eve could be:
1) Have fun. 2) Spend time with people whose company you enjoy 3) Try everything at least once 4) Remember skill points aren't everything, but a focused plan is better than a jack of all trades in the short term. 5) Have fun.
If you're not doing 1,2 and 5 to the best of your ability 3 and 4 won't make any difference to your enjoyment of Eve. It's not CCP's fault they provide the tools, it's up to you as a subscriber to implement those tools to create your own content and provide fun.
Eve isn't difficult per se, it's just the questions are difficult to understand. Once you have your questions, there's a whole range of resources available that can provide, if not a direct answer, then certainly a path to follow to understanding.
Use the test server, to trial different stuff too. Vastly under rated tool.
Its time to stand up against the bad empire based CEO telling falsehoods about what new characters can accomplish and pushing them towards an in game experience of drudgery and loneliness keeping them in the shadow of ignorance for at nest their own profit at worse apathy towards all the experiences that Eve has to offer. |

Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:14:00 -
[302] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Kiandoshia wrote:Duchess Amarrian wrote:high sec is really a joke. This, essentially. Being unprepared and putting all your eggs in one basket to make a nice juicy target for a suicide gank is the joke here, not highsec. There are a multitude of ways to protect yourself from suicide gankers, people just automatically assume they're "safe" in highsec, then get annoyed when they lose a ship because of their own lack of spatial awareness.
Gankers have already accepted the fact that they are going to lose a cheap ship. There is no deterrent for them at all. Risk is a myth that CCP keeps preaching hoping some will drink the cool-aid.
Only thing left is reward and acceptable losses. Acceptable losses are easily replaced, just buy more plex.
Telling new players there is something they can do is just lying to their face and hoping that they believe long enough to buy another plex.
|
|

CCP Falcon
8553

|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:14:00 -
[303] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor.
Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction.

CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1332
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:18:00 -
[304] - Quote
Risk vs Reward doesn't really apply to gankers ol boy. It's cost vs reward, a straight equation weighted massively towards reward. Risk implies a probability of something happening, which is increased if you're not paying attention. A hauler takes risks. A ganker knows he or she is going to lose their ship, exactly how much it will cost, and a fair approximation of what will drop and be recoverable.
Maybe the loot fairy isn't great one time, well the law of averages says that you're going to turn a huge profit if you do it enough times. |

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
6141
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:21:00 -
[305] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Risk vs Reward doesn't really apply to gankers ol boy. It's cost vs reward, a straight equation weighted massively towards reward. Risk implies a probability of something happening,... Risk is still there. It's just that the gankers have accepted the risk.
They accept that there is a 100% likelihood that the consequence will be destruction of their ship and sec status.
If there was no risk, why not gank them first and keep all your stuff to yourself? Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
. -á<- Argue this, not this ->-á( -í-¦ -£-û -í-¦) |

Colitina
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:22:00 -
[306] - Quote
The most laughable part about it all is that you are in fact ungankable while hauling if you know what you're doing.
The new DST can sport such amazing tanks you can only be ganked through piloting error. The freighter has been ungankable in high-sec from the day web bonused ships were introduced.
We're talking literally ungankable and yet people still complain. You know, I've never seen a ganker complain that someone web-warped to safety in front of him. Also, 0 complaints so far about 800,000 EHP deadspace DST's roaming about. |
|

CCP Falcon
8553

|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:22:00 -
[307] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Risk vs Reward doesn't really apply to gankers ol boy. It's cost vs reward, a straight equation weighted massively towards reward. Risk implies a probability of something happening, which is increased if you're not paying attention. A hauler takes risks. A ganker knows he or she is going to lose their ship, exactly how much it will cost, and a fair approximation of what will drop and be recoverable.
Because he's prepared himself, done the work and knows exactly what he's doing, how to achieve his objective, and knows the risk if the stuff he wants doesn't drop.
I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold.
Honestly, doing that in EVE is like dressing up in red, diving into the ring with a bull and complaining when you spend six weeks in hospital because you got the horns.
This might be internet spaceships, but it's not rocket science to protect yourself and fly with a little common sense.
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9298
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:22:00 -
[308] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote: Maybe the loot fairy isn't great one time, well the law of averages says that you're going to turn a huge profit if you do it enough times.
Except for the part where the "reward" is entirely dictated by the choices made by the person doing the hauling.
They've chosen to increase their own risk in exchange for more profit, other players can choose to take advantage of that. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Derrick Miles
EVENumbers
4322
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:24:00 -
[309] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. I'm not sure this analogy holds up very well. Any career criminal who makes a habit of getting caught by the police won't have a very long career. |

Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:25:00 -
[310] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction. 
I'm quite confident the suicide gankers work hard to find their targets. And highsec is better for it. |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
81
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:25:00 -
[311] - Quote
Damn you Falcon, I was honestly trying to help some of these guys understand D-scan. You gone and buried my post 2 pages deep in risk vs reward philosophy. |

Pepper Swift
The Vendunari End of Life
33057
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:25:00 -
[312] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:Risk vs Reward doesn't really apply to gankers ol boy. It's cost vs reward, a straight equation weighted massively towards reward. Risk implies a probability of something happening, which is increased if you're not paying attention. A hauler takes risks. A ganker knows he or she is going to lose their ship, exactly how much it will cost, and a fair approximation of what will drop and be recoverable. Because he's prepared himself, done the work and knows exactly what he's doing, how to achieve his objective, and knows the risk if the stuff he wants doesn't drop. I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. Honestly, doing that in EVE is like dressing up in red, diving into the ring with a bull and complaining when you spend six weeks in hospital because you got the horns. This might be internet spaceships, but it's not rocket science to protect yourself and fly with a little common sense.
Haha go falcon.. :D *falcooooon puuunch*
When life gives you melons you might be-ádyslexic. Racial clothing on any character? Yes please
|

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
899
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:34:00 -
[313] - Quote
CCP FALCON PUNCHES FOR ALL OF THE DAMAGE
CRITICAL HIT
/thread
The FALCON ALWAYS WINS |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9300
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:35:00 -
[314] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:CCP FALCON PUNCHES FOR ALL OF THE DAMAGE
CRITICAL HIT
/thread
The FALCON ALWAYS WINS
Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
899
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:36:00 -
[315] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning.
Just so glad to have him drop in for some common sense.
Make some friends, pay attention to things, learn to fit, you'll be just fine. Half ass it - you have no one to blame but yourself. |

Sophaya Fortelleren
The Conference Elite CODE.
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:38:00 -
[316] - Quote
CCP Falcon's words bring the unadulterated pure truth. I hearby proclaim as Prophet of The New Order that Falcon be elevated to sainthood in the name of 315.
From this day forth, CCP Falcon shall be known as "Saint Falcon the Explainer".
Glory upon thee. |

Ahost Gceo
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
188
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:43:00 -
[317] - Quote
I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be.
CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat. Hisec is hisec for a reason it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit.
The simple fix would be to make all weapons unable to be activated on a player ship in hisec much like how you can't launch a bomb. The obvious exceptions would be wardecs and duels.
I know the amount of sneering after people read this is off the charts but I do think there needs to be one place in EVE that is a safe haven for those who do not want to engage in PVP activity. I'm a friggin' banana. |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
899
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:45:00 -
[318] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be.
CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat. Hisec is hisec for a reason it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit.
The simple fix would be to make all weapons unable to be activated on a player ship in hisec much like how you can't launch a bomb. The obvious exceptions would be wardecs and duels.
I know the amount of sneering after people read this is off the charts but I do think there needs to be one place in EVE that is a safe haven for those who do not want to engage in PVP activity.
Confirming you totally missed his point.
PVP in high-sec is part of eve, a supported game mechanic, and your idea to turn it into disneyland is silly.
HTFU. Adapt or die. Beware the falcon punch. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20513
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:46:00 -
[319] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:I know the amount of sneering after people read this is off the charts but I do think there needs to be one place in EVE that is a safe haven for those who do not want to engage in PVP activity. CCP disagree.
New Player FAQ wrote:7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. Working as intended.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24180
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:47:00 -
[320] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning. Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this.  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Ahost Gceo
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
188
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:48:00 -
[321] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be.
CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat. Hisec is hisec for a reason it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit.
The simple fix would be to make all weapons unable to be activated on a player ship in hisec much like how you can't launch a bomb. The obvious exceptions would be wardecs and duels.
I know the amount of sneering after people read this is off the charts but I do think there needs to be one place in EVE that is a safe haven for those who do not want to engage in PVP activity. Confirming you totally missed his point. PVP in high-sec is part of eve, a supported game mechanic, and your idea to turn it into disneyland is silly. HTFU. Adapt or die. Beware the falcon punch. It isn't Disneyland if the actual fun and exciting parts about the game lie outside of that "land". People will get bored enough to venture outside and try new things. I'm a friggin' banana. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9300
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:48:00 -
[322] - Quote
Since I've been doing a lot of bumping lately, I am going to rename my Stabber "Falcon Punch".
You know, since it knocks you out of bounds. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9300
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:50:00 -
[323] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning. Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this. 
Well, if you wanted to give it to me, I can forward it to the correct people.
But if you choose not to get obviously scammed by me, you can forward it right to James 315, with the note of "purchase of shares" I believe. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24180
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:50:00 -
[324] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be. No, he really doesn't, because he has fundamentally misunderstood what kind of environment highsec is supposed to offer.
Quote:CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat. Just one problem: none of what you said is true. CONCORD is working as intended. Aggressors are not being allowed. The targets can defend themselves, both from alpha and DPS, and gankers don't really rely on alpha anyway since it's far too costly.
Quote:Hisec is hisec for a reason and it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit. No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen nextGǪ?
The GÇ£high securityGÇ¥ comes from the fact that you can gamble that people's miserliness will keep them from blowing you up GÇ¥just becauseGÇ¥ and instead need a compelling reason to pay the costs involved. That is all highsec is. The trick to living there is to always skew the odds so that gamble has a greater chance of paying off in your favour. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Ashiri Hareka
Paper Cats
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:51:00 -
[325] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:
Gankers have already accepted the fact that they are going to lose a cheap ship. There is no deterrent for them at all. Risk is a myth that CCP keeps preaching hoping some will drink the cool-aid.
Only thing left is reward and acceptable losses. Acceptable losses are easily replaced, just buy more plex.
Telling new players there is something they can do is just lying to their face and hoping that they believe long enough to buy another plex.
Perhaps I should be posting on my miner/hauler alt. She's not yet been ganked due to following the advice given here and in blogs such as Feyd's. (maybe she'll get ganked one day)
Losing a well tanked Procurer or Badger (up to 65k EHP) to a fleet of destroyers or a battlecruiser is an acceptable loss. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20513
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:52:00 -
[326] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning. Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this.  Send isk directly to James 315* with share purchase as the reason, he puts it all into the SRP.
*Linked because there's always an imposter or 2 about.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Ahost Gceo
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
188
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:52:00 -
[327] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be. No, he really doesn't, because he has fundamentally misunderstood what kind of environment highsec is supposed to offer. Quote:CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat. Just one problem: none of what you said is true. CONCORD is working as intended. Aggressors are not being allowed. The targets can defend themselves, both from alpha and DPS, and gankers don't really rely on alpha anyway since it's far too costly. Quote:Hisec is hisec for a reason and it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit. No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. The GÇ£high securityGÇ¥ comes from the fact that you can gamble that people's miserliness will keep them from blowing you up GÇ¥just becauseGÇ¥ and instead need a compelling reason to pay the costs involved. That is all highsec is. I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves. I'm a friggin' banana. |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
899
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:53:00 -
[328] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this. 
Send ISK to James 315 with reason "Share Purchase" - you will be listed at the http://minerbumping.com blog as a supporter (unless you do not wish to be) and will be given shares in the New Order itself. 1 share = 1 million ISK. The cash goes into the fund we use to purchase all of our gank ships, and is only doled out to agents who provide full records of their kills/losses.
We thank you for thinking of supporting us! |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5383
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:54:00 -
[329] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe. Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight 
For the love of god Montressor, stop. It hurts. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24180
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:54:00 -
[330] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves. Step 1: Find oneGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

loyalanon
The Conference Elite CODE.
460
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:56:00 -
[331] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec?
Thread. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5383
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:58:00 -
[332] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen nextGǪ?
A very easy way to remember this:
High Sec = High Cost for Aggression Low Sec = Low Cost for Aggression Null Sec = No Cost for Aggression
Simple, so very simple. I think only a child can get it. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
902
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 01:59:00 -
[333] - Quote
To show our love of the Falcon, tonight's roaming high-sec death fleet will feature ALL SHIPS named with something special
http://puu.sh/bcaBV/78e35e7311.jpg
:) :) |

Ahost Gceo
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
188
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:01:00 -
[334] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves. Step 1: Find oneGǪ Well if you read Minerbumping. I'm a friggin' banana. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
120
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:06:00 -
[335] - Quote
Donation made to the New Order on behalf of CCP Falcon.
This thread has made my day. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9301
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:06:00 -
[336] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:Tippia wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves. Step 1: Find oneGǪ Well if you read Minerbumping.
Autopilot doesn't count.
AFK is an acronym, but not for what you might think. It stands for A Free Kill. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
902
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:06:00 -
[337] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Donation made to the New Order on behalf of CCP Falcon.
This thread has made my day.
On behalf of our many brave agents, we thank you! |

Ahost Gceo
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
188
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:09:00 -
[338] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:Tippia wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves. Step 1: Find oneGǪ Well if you read Minerbumping. Autopilot doesn't count. AFK is an acronym, but not for what you might think. It stands for A Free Kill. And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
I'm a friggin' banana. |

Colitina
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:18:00 -
[339] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote: CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat.
I have a Mastydon that 50 Tornados cannot gank. Not fit for combat.
My Skiff would take about 9 Tornados Not fit for combat.
The only ship I fly in high-sec that can be ganked reasonably? My mission boat. Fit for combat.

The growing trend we can see here is that nearly everyone who wants ganking nerfed shows a lack of understanding of the game mechanics. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20514
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:20:00 -
[340] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
When a freighter is seen dropping out of warp 15KM off of a gate, it's autopiloting. If it's one of the gates into somewhere like Uedama, someone will have seen it, and it's going to explode shortly thereafter.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Colitina
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:23:00 -
[341] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Since I've been doing a lot of bumping lately, I am going to rename my Stabber "Falcon Punch".
You know, since it knocks you out of bounds. If that's the case you should name it "Tournament Micro Jump Unit" |

Darth Terona
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:24:00 -
[342] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
Wait.. Im a pvp guy and this makes no sense. Your better off bringing logistics for escort than guns ******* baddies are going to die anyway. No use shooting at them. But if you can keep your target alive until concord arrives.. You win
Dev your trolling the guy... Asshat
Op. Don't be such a baby. You will inevitably loose something in eve that's the flavor of the game |

Ahost Gceo
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
189
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:26:00 -
[343] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
When a freighter is seen dropping out of warp 15KM off of a gate, it's autopiloting. If it's one of the gates into somewhere like Uedama, someone will have seen it, and it's going to explode shortly thereafter. What happens when a freighter jumps through a gate and isn't autopiloting? Is it magically invulnerable to a bump and a gank? I'm a friggin' banana. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9301
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:31:00 -
[344] - Quote
Colitina wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Since I've been doing a lot of bumping lately, I am going to rename my Stabber "Falcon Punch".
You know, since it knocks you out of bounds. If that's the case you should name it "Tournament Micro Jump Unit"
Did that Super Smash Brothers reference seriously go over your head?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9301
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:31:00 -
[345] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote: What happens when a freighter jumps through a gate and isn't autopiloting? Is it magically invulnerable to a bump and a gank?
If he's smart and using webs, pretty much.
I have seen those freaking things warp sideways with Daredevil webs. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20516
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:32:00 -
[346] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
When a freighter is seen dropping out of warp 15KM off of a gate, it's autopiloting. If it's one of the gates into somewhere like Uedama, someone will have seen it, and it's going to explode shortly thereafter. What happens when a freighter jumps through a gate and isn't autopiloting? Is it magically invulnerable to a bump and a gank? Nope, however Red Frog and PushX seem to have no problems with delivering >99% of their courier contracts..... (see Kaarous Aldurald's post above)
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5385
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:40:00 -
[347] - Quote
Darth Terona wrote:Wait.. Im a pvp guy and this makes no sense. Your better off bringing logistics for escort than guns ******* baddies are going to die anyway. No use shooting at them. But if you can keep your target alive until concord arrives.. You win
Actually, in this specific case, since it was an alpha gank on a station, scouting and bringing guns (to gank the tornado) would be the best option. (A simple insta-dock bookmark and some tank would probably have worked too, as the ganker mentioned that it took them three tries to catch the OP)
Logi wouldn't be particularly effective. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Darth Terona
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:43:00 -
[348] - Quote
Aye. |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
174
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:43:00 -
[349] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen nextGǪ? A very easy way to remember this: High Sec = High Cost for Aggression Low Sec = Low Cost for Aggression Null Sec = No Cost for Aggression Simple, so very simple. I think only a child can get it.
And Tippia never will.
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
When a freighter is seen dropping out of warp 15KM off of a gate, it's autopiloting. If it's one of the gates into somewhere like Uedama, someone will have seen it, and it's going to explode shortly thereafter.
Point is, AFK or not, Warping after you jump in a system is still the same and gankers don't discriminate.
|

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11123
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:45:00 -
[350] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  Ah yes, the old blame the victim defense.
Ah yes, the old victim complex. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
122
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:49:00 -
[351] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Darth Terona wrote:Wait.. Im a pvp guy and this makes no sense. Your better off bringing logistics for escort than guns ******* baddies are going to die anyway. No use shooting at them. But if you can keep your target alive until concord arrives.. You win Actually, in this specific case, since it was an alpha gank on a station, scouting and bringing guns (to gank the tornado) would be the best option. (A simple insta-dock bookmark and some tank would probably have worked too, as the ganker mentioned that it took them three tries to catch the OP) Logi wouldn't be particularly effective.
Scouting is really the only thing that was needed in the case of the OP. The saddest part is that the scouting didn't need to involve alts or other players or anything. A very simple "Warp to 100km" and an understanding of what a Tornado can do would have meant this thread would never happen. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11123
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:50:00 -
[352] - Quote
Maduin Shi wrote:I'm quite confident the suicide gankers work hard to find their targets. And highsec is better for it.
It doesn't matter how much work you put into finding your targets. There is still a 50% chance that an item stack will drop or be destroyed with the ship. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11123
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:52:00 -
[353] - Quote
Ahost Gceo wrote:I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves.
If people want to burn their sec status and money to kill an empty freighter, more power to them. That doesn't indicate a problem with the game, sorry. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11123
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:54:00 -
[354] - Quote
Syn Shi wrote:Gankers have already accepted the fact that they are going to lose a cheap ship. There is no deterrent for them at all. Risk is a myth that CCP keeps preaching hoping some will drink the cool-aid.
Only thing left is reward and acceptable losses. Acceptable losses are easily replaced, just buy more plex.
Telling new players there is something they can do is just lying to their face and hoping that they believe long enough to buy another plex.
This is nothing but "think of the children!!!11" emotional garbage that simply soils the discussion. New players don't fly freighters. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3480
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:55:00 -
[355] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Kiandoshia wrote:Duchess Amarrian wrote:high sec is really a joke. This, essentially. Being unprepared and putting all your eggs in one basket to make a nice juicy target for a suicide gank is the joke here, not highsec. There are a multitude of ways to protect yourself from suicide gankers, people just automatically assume they're "safe" in highsec, then get annoyed when they lose a ship because of their own lack of spatial awareness.
This!
Seriously, if you want to learn how to protect yourself from suicide ganks, start ganking.
There's a reason that I've never been ganked successfully, despite fairly often carrying gank-worthy cargoes through both highsec and lowsec. Because I know how to gank, I recognise the early warning signs. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 - Gank incursion runners, win prizes! August 26-Sept 30. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5385
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:58:00 -
[356] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen nextGǪ? A very easy way to remember this: High Sec = High Cost for Aggression Low Sec = Low Cost for Aggression Null Sec = No Cost for Aggression Simple, so very simple. I think only a child can get it. And Tippia never will.
I'm not sure you get it. I was agreeing with Tippia. High sec is a place where aggression comes with a high cost (wardec or the loss of your ship(and assorted other penalties)). Low sec has a low cost (some sec status and gate guns).
You're proposing that HiSec disallow ganking entirely (since there's really no sensible way to increase the costs of aggression further).
Quote:Point is, AFK or not, Warping after you jump in a system is still the same and gankers don't discriminate.
Ok, if they don't discriminate, describe what search terms we can use to find a killmail* of all the fully tanked, empty freighters the originator of this line of discussion was claiming.
Also, ATK freighter pilots have a friend/alt to web them to counter the ~10+ ganker's friend/alt who's ready to bump them.
*since directly linking is inexplicably bad, mmmkay "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20517
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:58:00 -
[357] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen nextGǪ? A very easy way to remember this: High Sec = High Cost for Aggression Low Sec = Low Cost for Aggression Null Sec = No Cost for Aggression Simple, so very simple. I think only a child can get it. And Tippia never will. Tippia gets it just fine, you're the one who appears to have problems with it.
Quote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ahost Gceo wrote:And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
When a freighter is seen dropping out of warp 15KM off of a gate, it's autopiloting. If it's one of the gates into somewhere like Uedama, someone will have seen it, and it's going to explode shortly thereafter. Point is, AFK or not, Warping after you jump in a system is still the same and gankers don't discriminate I stated how people can tell if a freighter is auto piloting or not.
In fact I said nothing about AFK or discrimination in the post you quoted.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24181
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 02:59:00 -
[358] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen nextGǪ? A very easy way to remember this: High Sec = High Cost for Aggression Low Sec = Low Cost for Aggression Null Sec = No Cost for Aggression Simple, so very simple. I think only a child can get it. And Tippia never will. You've really lost it, haven't you.  Yeah, I will never get it, as demonstrated by the fact that I said the exact thing I wasn't supposed to ever get.
Quote:Point is, AFK or not, Warping after you jump in a system is still the same and gankers don't discriminate. Yes they do. The discriminate between hard and soft targets; between valuable and worthless targets; between obvious and unknown targets. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4397
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:12:00 -
[359] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:Point is, AFK or not, Warping after you jump in a system is still the same and gankers don't discriminate. Yes they do. The discriminate between hard and soft targets; between valuable and worthless targets; between obvious and unknown targets. where you get the patience i will never know, o7 =][= |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
184
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:13:00 -
[360] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction. 
They don't gank to loot. Some gank if the isk destroyed is less than isk lost. Other gank because they want to drive the competition out of the area. While others still will gank simply because their fun is to **** on another player. Looting? That's just a bonus.
Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit. |

Tolkaz Khamsi
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:13:00 -
[361] - Quote
I don't see why anyone still pilots Tech I freighters, honestly. Rather than try to move your junk to Jita, just contract it out and offer a discount if the buyer will come and pick it up at the station of your choice. I used to do this with minerals all the time. And for stuff that absolutely, positively has to be sold in Jita...well, that's why you use Red Frog or PushX, as other people have noted. The cost of the service is more than offset by the peace of mind. And if you have cargo (like 50 PLEX's, or something) that is simply too precious to move about...then don't move it, or move it in smaller chunks. Take the long way around, and use several different couriers to move it, and send them all out at different times. The only reason to pilot a freighter in hisec prior to Crius was to move big batches of ore or minerals around, but even that's less of a deal now that compression arrays can be anchored anywhere in hisec. (Though it also means that the inty filled to the gunwales with compressed veld now makes a pretty tasty -- and fragile -- gank target.)
And finally, I factor in the occasional indy gank to the costs of doing business. In the larger scheme of things, it's nothing in terms of bottom-line cost. (Unless you were carrying a cargohold full of PLEX, in which case you learned an expensive lesson you're not likely to forget.) The gankers get their momentary jollies (and a pathetic drop, more often than not); I get the knowledge that their ships will soon be Concordokken; and the great river of Eve commerce will keep flowing.
I don't get the appeal of ganking, honestly. It seems like a lot of work for so-so profit, and the security status loss adds up. (Though anonymous gank alts mediate that problem.) But at the same time I don't get the outrage against it either. It's a hazard easily avoided, and on the rare occasions you do get caught, it's no big deal unless you are being stupid in what you're hauling.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9301
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:21:00 -
[362] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote: Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame?
Call Scotland Yard. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24185
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:25:00 -
[363] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:They don't gank to loot. Some gank if the isk destroyed is less than isk lost. Substitute GÇ£pretty much no-oneGÇ¥ for GÇ£someGÇ¥
Quote:People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit. Substitute GÇ£someGÇ¥ for GÇ£noneGÇ¥. Of course, that's not the only place where you extract the profitGǪ  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5387
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:56:00 -
[364] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote: Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame? Call Scotland Yard.
This is an international game, good sir. We call INTERPOL. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

admiral root
Red Galaxy
1551
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 04:19:00 -
[365] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
And yet the guy mining with the ridiculously expensive meta MLUs in his lows and the ridiculously expensive storyline strips in the highs is the guy we'll drop everything to gank. If he has blue mid slots then we like it even more.
Would you care to try again? No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff |

DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
28988
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 04:53:00 -
[366] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe. Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight  
Well, that wasn't surprising.
Thanks for confirming Eve Online has turned into Grief Online.
This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap. Obviously the 'Risk v Reward' isn't balanced in-game.
If it was, this topic wouldn't be an issue and Eve would have no problem gaining and retaining players..When a Dev states he'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers are gained by changing that mechanic, then he's part of the problem that's been slowly planting this game deeper and deeper into a Vaporware grave.
Obviously due to the OGB from CCP Falcon to the 1/2 dozen or so Pro-Gank posters in this thread, there's no need for this topic to continue. Heh, at least I can say 'I Was There' when the final Coffin Nail was pounded into Eve..
DMC Faction Standing Repair Plan | California Eve Players | (Proposal) Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9302
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 04:55:00 -
[367] - Quote
Well, now I have to go kill another miner. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Zero Sum Gain
FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOM Silent Requiem
100
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:01:00 -
[368] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote: Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame? Call Scotland Yard. If you do something for reasons other than profit, you're a sociopath. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9302
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:03:00 -
[369] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote: Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame? Call Scotland Yard. If you do something for reasons other than profit, you're a sociopath.
Apparently it's unthinkable that profit might not be a motive for some, that some people don't care to just watch the green number get bigger, or might have goals in the game besides the accumulation of space wealth. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24189
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:06:00 -
[370] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, that wasn't surprising. Thanks for confirming Eve Online has turned into Grief Online. GÇ£Turned into?GÇ¥ It never changed in that regard. Well, it made it a lot safer and easier to stay alive over time, but the core aspect he's describing GÇö that you have to take responsibility for making things safe for yourself GÇö has been there since forever.
Oh, and a funny thing: griefing isn't, and never was, allowed.
Quote:Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap. GǪand the self-imposed victims. Let's not gloss over how they always bring that up when they feel that a playstyle they don't like is in desperate need of further nerfs. Risk and reward is largely balance in the game, at least now that null has been given some proper buffs.
Quote:If it was, this topic wouldn't be an issue and Eve would have no problem gaining and retaining players. The topic would arise regardless because some people simply don't understand the game. As for gaining and retaining playersGǪ does EVE actually have a problem?
Quote:at least I can say 'I Was There' when the final Coffin Nail was pounded into Eve. No, you can't. That happened half a decade before you even joined. The only thing that you were there for was your own realisation that you've been living in some dreamlike state where you hadn't realised what the game was. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5388
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:12:00 -
[371] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Well, that wasn't surprising.
Thanks for confirming Eve Online has turned into Grief Online.
Griefing is prohibited by the EULA.
Organized ganking started (probably) with m0o, less than a month after EVE's release.
Quote:This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap. Obviously the 'Risk v Reward' isn't balanced in-game.
Very true, HS is far too lucrative and too safe.
Quote:If it was, this topic wouldn't be an issue and Eve would have no problem gaining and retaining players..When a Dev states he'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers are gained by changing that mechanic, then he's part of the problem that's been slowly planting this game deeper and deeper into a Vaporware grave.
Ever hear of artists who are unwilling to sell out? That's Falcon and the rest of CCP.
Quote:Obviously due to the OGB from CCP Falcon to the 1/2 dozen or so Pro-Gank posters in this thread, there's no need for this topic to continue. Heh, at least I can say 'I Was There' when the final Coffin Nail was pounded into Eve..
If you dislike the game so much, why are you still here? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5389
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:20:00 -
[372] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame?
Call Scotland Yard. If you do something for reasons other than profit, you're a sociopath.
If you are unable to separate fantasy from reality, you may have schizophrenia, or a host of other disorders.
Are FPS players in death matches sociopaths for shooting each other without any reward (other than a listing that they killed something)? Are RTS players sociopaths for mercilessly destroying each other's towns? Was John F Kennedy a sociopath because he enjoyed stabbing his friends and family in the back during a rousing game of Diplomacy?
Now, you'll object to these comparisons, saying that those actions are the essential character of those games, and thus incomparable to ganking in EVE.
New Player Guide wrote:EVE Online is essentially a PvP (Player versus Player) game at its core. http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/communityassets/pdf/EVE-Online-New-Pilot-FAQ.pdf
Yeah. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tisiphone Dira
New Order Logistics CODE.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:26:00 -
[373] - Quote
Natural CloneKiller wrote:To keep this discussion going for a little bit longer and for the 'FALCON PUNCH' comment making me laugh so much, please accept last weeks instalment: http://imgur.com/z6s3vu9This was a picture I took on my phone of SARGE ZONE HAULING SERVICES on his live (4 second delay TWICH stream!!!) He accepted one of our contracts and just so happened to have a live TWITCH stream of the Hauling. We laughed so hard that someone would stream this and listen to Eve Radio + have others watching the stream. When we started watching his stream he was in a Charon and no the Talos army was not at hand at the time :) but you pick up the story here with him swapping to an Unfitted T1 Hauler! and just dropping our package into its cargo! When I get some time I will upload the FRAPS of the whole thing. I will let someone else go digging for his stream link as its all there recorded!
Oh THAT guy.
A fellow codie linked me his stream, I thought, well, this is a perfect opportunity to work on frieghter bumping skills, bout myself a stabber and away I went. Took him over an hour before he got a webber in.
Was only like 4 days ago. Twitch took the audio down though cause he had eve-radio playing which is a shame.
Who streams that nonsense, honestly.
|

Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
1049
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 05:26:00 -
[374] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:common sense.
This.
Don't haul anything more than 50mil in a T1 hauler, 200mil in a deep space transport, 3bil in a frieghter. Especially if you don't fit tank. If you are flying around with expensive cargo (costly implants, ships) use a blockade runner. You can't be scanned and if you cloak while travelling you are near-impossible to track.
If you are autopiloting a freighter, hope you use those slots that CCP gave you for tank.
And don't fly with lots of expensive stuff in your orca, ESPECIALLY without a Damage Control fit. They are the easiest cap to gank.
This is coming from someone who has participated plenty of times in ganks. Taking advantage of the stupidity of players is enjoyable, so if you don't want to get ganked, don't exhibit your stupidifty. Very simple.
(It's actually amazing to me how idiotic some players are, I have seen at least 20 people jump a freighter into low sec, and 2-3 people JUMP FREIGHTERS...through a GATE...they all died or ejected their ship for us to commandeer.) |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11125
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 06:30:00 -
[375] - Quote
The fact that Red Frog and Push Industries are still in business with reasonable rates and complete loads of contracts on a daily basis goes against the pro-Trammel crowd's assertion that freighter ganking is out of control.
Why? Because their pilots pay a portion of their contract rewards into an insurance pool that covers the cost of their freighters and collateral if they get ganked while completing a contract. If freighter ganking was out of control, either that pool would be depleted and their rates would skyrocket, or they'd simply go out of business.
Several of their pilots don't just use their freighters to haul other people's contracts, they also make their own contracts and haul them themselves, taking advantage of the insurance program. With this, any loss is absorbed by a large insurance pool rather than borne by a single pilot.
These guys figured out how to mitigate the risks of hauling in highsec and continue to do just fine with this system, so I don't see the problem. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1269
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 06:37:00 -
[376] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote: This might be internet spaceships, but it's not rocket science to protect yourself and fly with a little common sense.
I therefore declare this sentence the Sentence of The WeekGäó!
Love you, Falcon :D Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11125
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 06:39:00 -
[377] - Quote
Also, according to zKB, ONE FREIGHTER was suicide ganked yesterday, August 28th. Four were suicide ganked on August 27th. Freighter ganks are still exceptionally rare compared to the massive number of freighters that are constantly motoring around in highsec on any given day. More freighters are blown up by wartargets than in suicide ganks.
Those in this thread upset about their freighters being ganked are just bad players with a victim complex. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2587
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:00:00 -
[378] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote: Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame? Call Scotland Yard. This is an international game, good sir. We call INTERPOL.
They said they don't have jurisdiction over spreadsheets in space ... so they're out too.
One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2587
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:14:00 -
[379] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap. Obviously the 'Risk v Reward' isn't balanced in-game.
to clear up any confusion
Now with that out of the way, it is completely the ganked person's fault that they got ganked; and furthermore, risk v. reward has always been skewed toward hisec.
Fact of the matter is, your ISK/hour doesn't get much better (if at all) for mining as you go to less-safe areas - and that's before you even bother to count having to "spend" money on actively defending yourself. For the moment, the market is still settling itself out, as both miners and builders have to sort out how they're going about buying and selling minerals -- however, I think that we will see refined minerals start becoming less of a selling point for the lowends, and as such will slowly erode at the guys "safely" multiboxing in NPC corps.
But then again, the industry side of the game is much less apt to work together in the long run ... One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6720
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:21:00 -
[380] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap
Really? I wasnt aware that people's career choices were made available on the forums.
"Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9308
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:40:00 -
[381] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote: This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap
Really? I wasnt aware that people's career choices were made available on the forums.
Well, maybe not to that degree, but I suicide gank someone every time he posts some anti sandbox heresy in GD, so you could argue it that way. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
430
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:46:00 -
[382] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote: This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap
Really? I wasnt aware that people's career choices were made available on the forums. Well, maybe not to that degree, but I suicide gank someone every time he posts some anti sandbox heresy in GD, so you could argue it that way. +1  |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12855
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:47:00 -
[383] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote: Miner gankers are a perfect example. People will gank miners for various reasons and none of which have anything to do with looting the wreck to turn a profit.
Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame? Call Scotland Yard. If you do something for reasons other than profit, you're a sociopath.
Its ironic that the people that spout that word are the ones who don't want to interact with other people in this pvp game. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9311
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:48:00 -
[384] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote: This thread is filled with a lot of controversial hoopla about 'Staying Safe' with the convenient ancient meme excuse of 'Risk v Reward'. Funny thing is it's the criminal careers that are constantly spouting that bullcrap
Really? I wasnt aware that people's career choices were made available on the forums. Well, maybe not to that degree, but I suicide gank someone every time he posts some anti sandbox heresy in GD, so you could argue it that way. +1 
The idea of doing so, of course, comes from Feyd's kill it forward program. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20521
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 09:59:00 -
[385] - Quote
Andski wrote:Also, according to zKB, ONE FREIGHTER was suicide ganked yesterday, August 28th. Four were suicide ganked on August 27th. Freighter ganks are still exceptionally rare compared to the massive number of freighters that are constantly motoring around in highsec on any given day. More freighters are blown up by wartargets than in suicide ganks.
Those in this thread upset about their freighters being ganked are just bad players with a victim complex. One freighter is way too many for some people, they won't rest until it's impossible to do anything that might hurt someone's feelings or internet spaceship, i.e. removing all of the "sharp edges" and "pointy sticks" from the game.
They're the internet spaceships equivalent of the idiots that have been trying, for the last decade or so, to replace common sense with legislation under the guise of health and safety.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6722
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:01:00 -
[386] - Quote
Zero Sum Gain wrote: If you do something for reasons other than profit, you're a sociopath.
Yeah, no one ever did anything anti-social or harmful to others for a profit.
That never happens. "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24192
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:04:00 -
[387] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame?
Call Scotland Yard. This is an international game, good sir. We call INTERPOL. They said they don't have jurisdiction over spreadsheets in space ... so they're out too. We're going to have to callGǪ (dramatic pause) GǪspace cop! =ƒÿ¦ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20522
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:12:00 -
[388] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Velicitia wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Goodness, shooting someone for *fun* in a videogame?
Call Scotland Yard. This is an international game, good sir. We call INTERPOL. They said they don't have jurisdiction over spreadsheets in space ... so they're out too. We're going to have to callGǪ (dramatic pause) GǪ space cop! =ƒÿ¦ As a last resort we can call Defective Teg.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1336
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:28:00 -
[389] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold.
I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd"
If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20523
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:42:00 -
[390] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die The same is true of many things, competing in motorsport, piloting an aircraft, driving a car, crossing the street, life itself etc, etc.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
4083
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:43:00 -
[391] - Quote
I recently lost a Crane Blockade Runner to a Tornado. I would have congratulated the Tornado pilot had I actually been carrying anything at the time. The loss is entirely my fault, and could have been prevented.
I learned my lesson and immediately bought another Crane, undocking at the very same station (Jita 4-4). I of course used my insta-undock [tip: Jita 4 - Moon 1 is aligned with the 4-4 undock].
Everything that happens to you in EVE is because of something you did, or didn't do. Take responsibility! Don't blame others, game mechanics, or whatever; those are just lame excuses.
Forgive me, but I can't help but post this too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=j6mAu1IqibA#t=85
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12858
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:49:00 -
[392] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd" If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you.
If you lose a freighter in high sec you did something wrong. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Nitchiu
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:51:00 -
[393] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd" If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you.
So if I understand correctly you don't like the game mechanics that allows people to have friends? Cause your scenario is not 1vs1 but X vs 1.
I understand that you don't like being blown up without being able to do anything but what I don't understand is why you think that you should be able to do anything against groups of players when you are alone. If you are being bumped get friends or if you are anti-social maybe an alt. "My friends are not close/not online/I don't have any" Well then that's unfortunate, maybe you should avoid hauling alone and contract to Red Frog who seem to be able to avoid the unavoidable game mechanics.
Also people who die when doing 'everything right' are a very very small minority of ganks. 99%+ I'm willing to bet are people who anti-tank, haul AFK, haul cargos too expensive or like the OP accepted obvious bait contracts. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9312
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 10:53:00 -
[394] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you.
Well, first of all, you shouldn't be mad at that, because destruction of assets is what literally turns the wheels of the game's economy.
It is the one vital function needed to keep the game running. Eventually, everybody has to do their part, whether they are the ones doing the doing, or the ones being done.
Secondly, you can do everything right, and you will almost never die. I have been running a freighter alt for literally months now, through all of those pipeline systems, often during prime time hours.
And I have yet to even be yellowboxed. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Helicity Boson
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
676
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 11:00:00 -
[395] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
Working As Intended.
A quick look at your lossmail reveals a prorator with all but 1 relevant slot dedicated towards cargo capacity, and a single module for mobility (which further reduces your resilience). So far, so good. You say you were doing "deliveries", if that means courier contracts... well...
An examination of where your loss occurs (a dead end highsec system called Ono) is more interesting. By nature, this system is not on any "regular" routes (dead-end and all) and is used for quite a bit of missioning judging by the NPCs killed statistics.
It seems somewhat unlikely therefore that a professional ganker would normally be lurking there; traffic in Ono is less than 5% of what it is on the traderoutes to and from Jita. One might therefore suspect that this was a planned hit. The contract having been set up by an alt of the gankers. A classic, if rather pointless, ploy.
How you managed to get blown up on a station eludes me, were you perchance autopiloting? ;)
nevertheless, you chose to fly around without even a token tank. You chose to (presumably) autopilot to the station, else you'd have warped to 0 and docked.
Welcome to the sandbox, complain less, think more, and you'll be fine. |

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
1114
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 11:11:00 -
[396] - Quote
I've run haulers between several "highly utilized sites" many times, and I've even mined.
But the only fun in doing that is that I risk getting ganked.
If it wasn't for the fact that I actually have to ponder the risk and prepare for a possible loss, it would have been extremely boring.
CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.
|

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4405
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 11:46:00 -
[397] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe. Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight  i love you. =][= |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20528
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 11:57:00 -
[398] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe. Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight  i love you. DMC is extremely miffed at CCP Falcon for this post and for shattering his ill-conceived illusions of what Eve is.
Another reason to <3 CCP Falcon.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4406
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 12:11:00 -
[399] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:DMC is extremely miffed at CCP Falcon for this post and for shattering his ill-conceived illusions of what Eve is.
Another reason to <3 CCP Falcon. i know its glorious. =][= |

Claud Tiberius
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 13:22:00 -
[400] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Claud Tiberius wrote:OP should transport in a full-on tanked BS. There are probably a few with enough cargo space. If not, I'm sure any shield tanked ship with cargo extenders will do fine. So long as your in high sec, they wont attack you since your tank should survive long for concord to arrive  assuming its a small hostile fleet (it usually is). Its also quite easy to avoid them. Jump from station to station, figure out who's following you, how many there are. Bait them into attacking you and if you can, dock to be out of harms way. Let concord free the road :P Please read the thread before posting. Your recommendation would not even work let alone how idiotic of a solution it is to the problem. Unless of course you are trolling, then good job. Please explain. If you are in a BS and get blown up in one shot then you shouldn't be flying it anyway. Once upon a time the Golem had a Raven hull and it looked good. Then it transformed into a plataduck. The end. |

Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
6729
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 13:24:00 -
[401] - Quote
Claud Tiberius wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Claud Tiberius wrote:OP should transport in a full-on tanked BS. There are probably a few with enough cargo space. If not, I'm sure any shield tanked ship with cargo extenders will do fine. So long as your in high sec, they wont attack you since your tank should survive long for concord to arrive  assuming its a small hostile fleet (it usually is). Its also quite easy to avoid them. Jump from station to station, figure out who's following you, how many there are. Bait them into attacking you and if you can, dock to be out of harms way. Let concord free the road :P Please read the thread before posting. Your recommendation would not even work let alone how idiotic of a solution it is to the problem. Unless of course you are trolling, then good job. Please explain. If you are in a BS and get blown up in one shot then you shouldn't be flying it anyway.
I highly recommend Apoc/Armag hulls for it, especially Blops. You can trick them out with some pretty insane cargo space for a warship that can jump out of trouble. "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á- CCP Falcon
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7909
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 13:49:00 -
[402] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote: What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you.
What you are describing here is what makes EVE .....EVE. With the exception of staying docking, NOTHING is 100% safe. That is the game mechanics that gives EVe it's soul, without that, EVE is just another bit of 1s and 0s like all the rest.
Just like real life, you can lock yourself in your house, a meteor or a tornado can still destroy it and kill you. If you go underground, you can still die in a flood or earth quake. Bottom line, you gonna die lol. Might as well yell "Yolo" and leeroy down the street.
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7909
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 13:57:00 -
[403] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote: Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on.
You might not be CEO of CCP yet, but you're the CEO of my heart 
Quote:Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight 
But, but, scaremongering and hatred is literally all people like that have. They can't admit that they are ...mentally incompatible with the game they've chosen to play/invest time in so they have to try SOMETHING to get you guys to change the game to fit them. Worst part is that they are totally unaware of the fact that if they do change the game, THEY will be the ones leaving because it wouldn't be the game they fell in love with any more lol.
This is what the "hand-holding" crowd things of CCP Falcon now.
http://i.imgur.com/2LR4mkW.gif |

Effect One
Vengeful Swan
165
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 14:08:00 -
[404] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:This might be internet spaceships, but it's not rocket science to protect yourself and fly with a little common sense.
Best. Quote. Ever.
cba |

Teinyhr
Venlith Taal
417
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 14:12:00 -
[405] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:there is no absolute security in EVE. You consent to PvP each time you undock. Do not fly what you can't afford to lose and consider every ship you undock to already be dead.
Actually I believe ganking in newbie systems is heavily frowned upon and will result in a ban. But outside of those you are correct. |

Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
3141
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 14:37:00 -
[406] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:Local Chat: [WT] -- o_O I have NEVER seen anyone do that (implied [in hisec]) before me -- yeah, you pick up a few things from time to time. Sorry I didn't make myself a target for you  (continue conversation about random things)
I have gotten a pm once that said something very similar once. It is fun getting that type of response, like you actually taught someone that there are other ways to do 'stuff' in game. Much better then the tears others enjoy so much. |

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9198
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 14:37:00 -
[407] - Quote
Jenn ...
... that confuses the **** out of me. I was aiming to be a nicer person ... ... seriously ... ... well I am still failing at it ... ... and now I wonder if it's a good idea in the first place.
THANKS JENN! -.-' http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
905
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:01:00 -
[408] - Quote
Andski wrote:Also, according to zKB, ONE FREIGHTER was suicide ganked yesterday, August 28th. Four were suicide ganked on August 27th. Freighter ganks are still exceptionally rare compared to the massive number of freighters that are constantly motoring around in highsec on any given day. More freighters are blown up by wartargets than in suicide ganks.
Those in this thread upset about their freighters being ganked are just bad players with a victim complex.
There, we fixed it for you :)
http://puu.sh/bcMBU/c419690387.jpg |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20536
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:13:00 -
[409] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Andski wrote:Also, according to zKB, ONE FREIGHTER was suicide ganked yesterday, August 28th. Four were suicide ganked on August 27th. Freighter ganks are still exceptionally rare compared to the massive number of freighters that are constantly motoring around in highsec on any given day. More freighters are blown up by wartargets than in suicide ganks.
Those in this thread upset about their freighters being ganked are just bad players with a victim complex. There, we fixed it for you :) http://puu.sh/bcMBU/c419690387.jpg Once again CODE. utters the immortal words "Challenge Accepted"
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works with it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:21:00 -
[410] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:Tippia wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Being at the keyboard is a fallacy. Doesn't make a difference. Eh, no. What kind of fallacy do you think it is?  And being at the keyboard isn't bad advice either, by the way: it helps you not be there when the ganker arrives. This. You can't Dscan while AFK. Back when I still mined I avoided a couple ganks in my mackinaw due to a healthy dose of paranoia, preparation, and liberal use of the 360 degree dscan. By the time the cats landed on grid all they saw were the receding tail lights of my rocket car. DScan is pointless in Hi-sec. You know, that placer where the majority of ganking occurs. As Tippia already pointed out, without CONCORD it would be called ganking. It's a fallacy WRT that it doesn't help stop a gank. I've already listed the reasons why.
Dscan is pointless. lolwhat?! dscan spam on short range spam and you see anything landing before its there; buying you time to get ur miner out... you saying dscan is pointless in high shows how little you know on how to be safe. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20538
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:26:00 -
[411] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Dscan is pointless. lolwhat?! dscan spam on short range spam and you see anything landing before its there; buying you time to get ur miner out... you saying dscan is pointless in high shows how little you know on how to be safe. Oh god no, please don't start him off again....
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works with it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24197
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:26:00 -
[412] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Andski wrote:Also, according to zKB, ONE FREIGHTER was suicide ganked yesterday, August 28th. Four were suicide ganked on August 27th. Freighter ganks are still exceptionally rare compared to the massive number of freighters that are constantly motoring around in highsec on any given day. More freighters are blown up by wartargets than in suicide ganks.
Those in this thread upset about their freighters being ganked are just bad players with a victim complex. There, we fixed it for you :) http://puu.sh/bcMBU/c419690387.jpg Ahhh. Money well spent.  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
444
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:27:00 -
[413] - Quote
LoL... popcorn time. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
128
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:32:00 -
[414] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:LoL... popcorn time.
Gonna have to run to the store soon. Popcorn supplies are getting low at this point. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20538
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:35:00 -
[415] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:LoL... popcorn time. Gonna have to run to the store soon. Popcorn supplies are getting low at this point. Got you covered
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works with it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
128
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:43:00 -
[416] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:LoL... popcorn time. Gonna have to run to the store soon. Popcorn supplies are getting low at this point. Got you covered
I'm on a strict NPH free diet  |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20539
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 15:54:00 -
[417] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:LoL... popcorn time. Gonna have to run to the store soon. Popcorn supplies are getting low at this point. Got you covered I'm on a strict NPH free diet  I derped, wrong image ... blames 3rd party clipboard utility.
Should have been http://i.imgur.com/0hqn6Nd.png The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works with it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Yarda Black
Militaris Industries Northern Coalition.
391
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:21:00 -
[418] - Quote
You cannot expect CCP to protect you. Apart from design philosophy, its simply not in their best interest to do so. Destruction creates inflation. Destroying a mineral heavy ship like a freighter especially. Miners are even better. Destroying the cure for inflation (minerals) will increase prices, which will lead to more people buying plex. Cos we all know that more effort is not something everybody likes. People with wallets don't have to.
Also; don't waste your time buying all the stories about AFK ganking. Its just stories. So take some time to consider what it is you want to do and if your current method (a freighter) is really needed. Do all the things you can do to minimize the risk (fittings, webs, route, BM's, a scout etc) and then look at the reward.
In a game where multiple players play the same game, only a portion will play with you. The rest will either ignore you (in this case me for example) or play against you.
|

E-2C Hawkeye
State War Academy Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:26:00 -
[419] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:You can do something about it yourself. No need to ask CCP for help.
You already have big guns too. Just like the other guy does. You just choose not to train for them, or not to use them. That's not the fault of the other guy who is just having fun. He doesn't mean anything against you personally. This may be somewhat accurate but not really true. Even when you fit for tank or min/max mining or hauling it doesnGÇÖt leave room for guns. Should you even fit guns on your hauler/miner it wonGÇÖt stop the gank. Indy doesnGÇÖt need the ability to fight back with guns, they need the ability to defend or defend better then what they have at the moment. A solo hauler can trivially protect himself against a solo ganker with the tools already available. A hauler needs organized and intelligent help (one character will do in most situations) to protect himself from a large group of gankers. In other words, the hauler has the advantage in solo encounters and needs far fewer players to have the advantage in group encounters. Why do haulers need more help? They donGÇÖt need more help they need more options. A hauler should need 1-3 more people or alts to solo haul. Miners have more options in the form of a skiff. A properly tank fit skiff will normally send would be gankers on to easier targets.
Haulers need the same option to fit tank or cargo. Should they have a survivable tank fit against reasonable gank squad and they chose not to use it then that on them.
|

Paranoid Loyd
1642
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:34:00 -
[420] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Haulers need the same option to fit tank or cargo. Should they have a survivable tank fit against reasonable gank squad and they chose not to use it then that on them.
Are you really trying to argue it's not like this already?
"PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

BoBoZoBo
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
471
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:36:00 -
[421] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
I LOVE U
I would also leave EVE it it started hand-holding players too stupid to take care of themselves. Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20544
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:44:00 -
[422] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Haulers need the same option to fit tank or cargo. Should they have a survivable tank fit against reasonable gank squad and they chose not to use it then that on them. Are you really trying to argue it's not like this already? Some people won't be happy until their haulers are produced by Polaris, and they'll still whine because there's a 0.1% hole in the resists.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works with it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Carlos Brutus
Limitless Inc. Holdings
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:52:00 -
[423] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe. Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight 
Oh yes, you're never 100% safe unless you're a scammer sitting in dock all day. Funny how that one always slips past the radar.
|

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4159
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 16:58:00 -
[424] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. guns are pretty useless in high sec. Since you can't start firing until they do without getting concorded, you can still see your hauler volleyed off the field before you can reduce their ganking squad enough to save it. And with sec tags, gankers don't really need to put time or effort in to keep themselves high enough to avoid being valid targets for a preemptive hit, they simply spend some of their victims isk on tags and instantly become "good" again.
Make kill rights so they only get used up once that killright has been used to kill the pirate with the equivalent value of the ship they killed to earn it (so if you kill a billion isk of ship, it can be repeatedly used until it's cost you a billion isk), and guns will be back in play.
CCP Falcon wrote:because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. It's not though, is it? It's not at all dark and gritty, it's just that people can run up to noobs and smash their heads in in a single hit. It's no more dark and gritty than a PvP WoW server.
EVE is moving to a place where there are no more consequences. Take the sec tags for example. Now you can run around ganking like crazy, wait 30 days for your kill rights to drop off, pay a bunch of isk to jump your sec status back up instantly and shazzam you are no longer a pirate.
And part of it is that too much focus has gone into making people vulnerable. Take corps for example. Awoxing being so easy to pull off and the lack of benefits of being in a player run corp means there's no real reason to move out of an NPC corp in high sec. It would be better to give people more opportunities to choose to put themselves at risk because it's worth doing. Making it too tough then just saying "tough luck" whenever someone tries and fails isn't really good encouragement to try again.
I would love EVE to be a dark and gritty hardcore game, but that's really not what it is. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

Carlos Brutus
Limitless Inc. Holdings
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:01:00 -
[425] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction. 
Which is never a problem if the cargo is a scam cargo to begin with and the collateral goes back to the contract originator, who might even be part of the bank.
Are you paid to keep the community healthy or to engage in snark contests with players who disagree with aspects of the game? It's hard to tell these days. Seems pretty clear you're playing to your crowd of posterior cleaners. It's not as if the forum lacks for people to defend the harsh dark crapfest that is Eve. Obviously your real mission in your job is to score points on newbies who don't quite understand the game mechanics or don't agree with them. Good luck with that. There will always be players in Eve who hate ganking and scamming and the combination of the two and neither you nor anyone else will ever change that.
It's a pretty sad game then the developers take to the forums to tell part of the player base that they're stupid ("it's not rocket science") and to make ridiculous comparisons to real life police, who, by the way, do have crime prevention programs and actual punishment for criminals. Maybe you need to go back to moderating the forums rather than trolling for likes. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24198
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:13:00 -
[426] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:They donGÇÖt need more help they need more options. They have every option in the book. How on earth do they need more?!
Quote:A hauler should not need 1-3 more people or alts to solo haul. Then a ganker should not need 5GÇô20 more people to gank either, deal? Same goes for the miners GÇö they have plenty of options and all of them require more than one person to gank, so I suppose you're suggesting that all exhumers and barges get nerfed back to more reasonable levels too?
Lucas Kell wrote:guns are pretty useless in high sec. No. Just no. They work just as well there as they do everywhere else. Gankers, as a rule, can be shot without being concorded as it is, and they have to resort to such fragile ships to get any kind of damage output that, unlike the haulers, they are very easy to volley off the field. There's a reason why high-DPS destroyers are the ganker tool of the trade rather than any kind of volley monster.
Quote:Make kill rights so they only get used up once that killright has been used to kill the pirate with the equivalent value of the ship they killed to earn it (so if you kill a billion isk of ship, it can be repeatedly used until it's cost you a billion isk), and guns will be back in play. That's not what kill rights are for. You are confusing two completely unconnected mechanics: one is the right to not have CONCORD mess with you and another is the ability to enforce a cost on other players.
Quote:EVE is moving to a place where there are no more consequences. No, it really isn't. Between kill rights, new crimewatch, harsher sec penalties, massively increased costs, and more mechanics to bring the fight to the gankers if they bother you, the consequences have never been higher. Sec tags makes a very minute difference to one of those things and were frankly needed to balance out the massive increases in penalties introduced over the years. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20545
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:17:00 -
[427] - Quote
Carlos Brutus wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction.  ...snip...It's not as if the forum lacks for people to defend the harsh dark crapfest that is Eve. If it's such a crapfest, why are you playing it? It must have some appeal or redeeming quality.
Quote:Obviously your real mission in your job is to score points on newbies who don't quite understand the game mechanics or don't agree with them. Good luck with that. I'd say his job is to keep it real and to correct misconceptions about the nature of the game, he does it pretty well too.
Quote: There will always be players in Eve who hate ganking and scamming and the combination of the two and neither you nor anyone else will ever change that. Maybe they should play a game more suited to their wants then....
Quote:It's a pretty sad game when the developers take to the forums to tell part of the player base that they're stupid ("it's not rocket science") and to make ridiculous comparisons to real life police, who, by the way, do have crime prevention programs and actual punishment for criminals. Yet despite RL police having crime prevention programs and "actual" punishment for criminals, we still have crime *
If anything Concord has a far better record than any real life police department, it's impossible to evade Concord.
*I'll let Jenn aSide weigh in on that aspect if he wants to, he's actually a RL cop. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24198
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:18:00 -
[428] - Quote
Carlos Brutus wrote:Oh yes, you're never 100% safe unless you're a scammer sitting in dock all day. Funny how that one always slips past the radar. Scammers have exactly the risks and rewards other players give them, and nothing more. Funny how people refuse to take responsibility for what they willingly hand out, and then come back to complain someone has they have exactly what they've given him.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
129
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:22:00 -
[429] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Carlos Brutus wrote:Oh yes, you're never 100% safe unless you're a scammer sitting in dock all day. Funny how that one always slips past the radar. Scammers have exactly the risks and rewards other players give them, and nothing more. Funny how people refuse to take responsibility for what they willingly hand out, and then come back to complain someone has they have exactly what they've given him.
Well, the scammer has the extra risk of people not being greedpffft sorry couldn't say it with a straight face. |

E-2C Hawkeye
State War Academy Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:30:00 -
[430] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Haulers need the same option to fit tank or cargo. Should they have a survivable tank fit against reasonable gank squad and they chose not to use it then that on them. Are you really trying to argue it's not like this already? There are many more options for hauling than there are for barges. I am saying there are some but not enough options to fit tank. It is so easy and cost to little to gank freighters atm that people are doing it on empty freighters for the lulz.
Ganking should always be possible but it should come at a greater price and with greater consequences and not with the trivial shat we have now where alts are trained and disposed of like a revolving door.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24198
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:33:00 -
[431] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:I am saying there are some but not enough options to fit tank. It is so easy and cost to little to gank freighters atm that people are doing it on empty freighters for the lulz. It has never been more difficult. It has never been as rare. Costs have only ever gone up. So where on earth do you get the idea that it should be even more difficult and costly? If it's so easy and cheap, why aren't everyone doing it? Why are so few killed? Why is it so ridiculously safe to fly a freighter?
Quote:Ganking should always be possible but it should come at a greater price and with greater consequences Why?
Quote:not with the trivial shat we have now where alts are trained and disposed of like a revolving door. Do you have any proof whatsoever to suggest that anything even remotely like that is actually happening? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

ashley Eoner
332
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:37:00 -
[432] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. guns are pretty useless in high sec. Since you can't start firing until they do without getting concorded, you can still see your hauler volleyed off the field before you can reduce their ganking squad enough to save it. And with sec tags, gankers don't really need to put time or effort in to keep themselves high enough to avoid being valid targets for a preemptive hit, they simply spend some of their victims isk on tags and instantly become "good" again. Make kill rights so they only get used up once that killright has been used to kill the pirate with the equivalent value of the ship they killed to earn it (so if you kill a billion isk of ship, it can be repeatedly used until it's cost you a billion isk), and guns will be back in play. CCP Falcon wrote:because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas. It's not though, is it? It's not at all dark and gritty, it's just that people can run up to noobs and smash their heads in in a single hit. It's no more dark and gritty than a PvP WoW server. EVE is moving to a place where there are no more consequences. Take the sec tags for example. Now you can run around ganking like crazy, wait 30 days for your kill rights to drop off, pay a bunch of isk to jump your sec status back up instantly and shazzam you are no longer a pirate. And part of it is that too much focus has gone into making people vulnerable. Take corps for example. Awoxing being so easy to pull off and the lack of benefits of being in a player run corp means there's no real reason to move out of an NPC corp in high sec. It would be better to give people more opportunities to choose to put themselves at risk because it's worth doing. Making it too tough then just saying "tough luck" whenever someone tries and fails isn't really good encouragement to try again. I would love EVE to be a dark and gritty hardcore game, but that's really not what it is. Indeed it always cracks me up hard when people try to pretend that eve is dark and gritty and HARDCORE YO!!! The reality is that a pvp WoW server is just as dark and gritty and almost as hardcore. In eve I can only lose a ship if I undock really while in WoW I can be ganked in the auction house of the biggest city for my faction. If I die in eve I spend a few isk and I'm back exactly where I was before. Only if I'm flying a t3 do I lose experience or anything. Meanwhile old school korean MMos like Lineage 2 had FFA pvp everywhere (except some sections of some towns) and when you died you would lose weeks of grinding even if your gear is cheap and you're not max level .
Ganking is so easy these days thanks to the buffs that I'm surprised it took this long before people started complaining about freighter ganks.
EDIT : Part of the problem is that some of the freighters are dropping billions which is enough to cover the costs of ganking empty freighters for a full day. Only need 10-20 catas/talos/brutix in a mix. You don't even really have to spend the big bucks either. A mix of catas with some talos to bump the dps a little is more then enough. Hell 12 decently trained catas can do +250k damage in .05. Thats a super cheap fleet for ganking. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24198
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:40:00 -
[433] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Ganking is so easy these days thanks to the buffs What buffs? If it's so easy, why is it so rare?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

ashley Eoner
332
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:50:00 -
[434] - Quote
Tippia wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:Ganking is so easy these days thanks to the buffs What buffs? If it's so easy, why is it so rare? Hello cata thrasher buffs? The introduction of BS guns on BC platforms? You don't remember the olden days when you had to spend real isk on a BS to gank something big.
Ganks are a daily event in highsec.
I imagine there'd be more ganks if more people realized how easy it is to do. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1087
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:53:00 -
[435] - Quote
It's funny that people are saying EVE isn't hardcore because it's too easy to kill people.
Interesting also that making the game more hardcore apparently involves harsher penalties for gankers, while the people dumb enough to get themselves killed are apparently perfectly balaced as they are.
Someone mentioned games which have SP loss for any death. How about we add that to EVE - for everyone. I'm sure AFK freighter pilots would love that. [witty image] - Stream |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24198
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 17:55:00 -
[436] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Hello cata thrasher buffs? The introduction of BS guns on BC platforms? You mean the things that not even managed to maintain the status quo in the face of the massive nerfs? The ones that led to ganks becoming more and more rare over time? No, that was not a buff GÇö those were nerfs that weren't as massive as they could have been without something to balance them out.
Quote:Ganks are a daily event in highsec. So in other words: laughably rare. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1617
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:18:00 -
[437] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:EVE is moving to a place where there are no more consequences.
So the only people who shouldn't have consequences for their choices are HiSec bears? Got it.
Lucas Kell wrote:I would love EVE to be a dark and gritty hardcore game, but that's really not what it is.
It is. Maybe you've just gotten used to it.
Epic Space Cat |

ashley Eoner
332
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:26:00 -
[438] - Quote
Tippia wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:Hello cata thrasher buffs? The introduction of BS guns on BC platforms? You mean the things that not even managed to maintain the status quo in the face of the massive nerfs? The ones that led to ganks becoming more and more rare over time? No, that was not a buff GÇö those were nerfs that would have been downright insulting unless the gankers were given something in the way of compensation. Quote:Ganks are a daily event in highsec. So in other words: laughably rare. What massive nerfs?
Less and less? Are you even playing the same game or are you just sticking to some sort of propaganda plan to get ganking buffed even more?
Ganking is more common then ever. I remember mining through all the hulkageddons and not only did I never get killed I rarely saw a ganker. Today I fly out to a belt and there's a good chance i"ll have a ganker come through unless I'm hiding in a dead end out far from markets mining crap ore for terrible isk per hour.
Uedama (sp) aufay etc are sites of daily ganking.
How is something that occurs daily in a variety of systems suddenly considered "laughably rare"?? |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24200
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:35:00 -
[439] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:What massive nerfs? Numerous CONCORD buffs. Numerous target buffs. Numerous price increases. Numerous increases in penalties.
Quote:Ganking is more common then ever. No. Just no. Even suggesting such a thing is pure ignorance.
If you're going to make that kind of claim, you need to back it up with some kind of actual evidence. You need to show that several dozens of haulers get ganked (not just killed GÇö ganked) in each and every of the bottleneck systems. You need to show dozens of mission runners getting blown up in each mission hub. You need to show clouds of CONCORD constantly surrounding every gate in and out of Jita (to say nothing of 4-4 itself). You need to demonstrate dozens of well-known ganking corps doing their business in said spots, rather than just a handful.
Hint: you will not be able to do any of this, because ganks have never been as rare as they are at the moment. You are either ignorant or lying. Take your pick.
Quote:Uedama (sp) aufay etc are sites of daily ganking. So in other words, they're not just laughably rare but also laughably easy to avoid. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

ashley Eoner
332
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:39:00 -
[440] - Quote
Tippia wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:What massive nerfs? Numerous CONCORD buffs. Numerous target buffs. Numerous price increases. Numerous increases in penalties. Huge increases in the manpower and time required. Vastly improved means of striking back. Vastly improved means of defence. Quote:Ganking is more common then ever. No. Just no. Even suggesting such a thing is pure ignorance. If you're going to make that kind of claim, you need to back it up with some kind of actual evidence. You need to show that several dozens of haulers get ganked (not just killed GÇö ganked) in each and every of the bottleneck systems. You need to show dozens of mission runners getting blown up in each mission hub. You need to show clouds of CONCORD constantly surrounding every gate in and out of Jita (to say nothing of 4-4 itself). You need to demonstrate dozens of well-known ganking corps doing their business in said spots, rather than just a handful. Hint: you will not be able to do any of this, because ganks have never been as rare as they are at the moment. You are either ignorant or lying. Take your pick. Quote:Uedama (sp) aufay etc are sites of daily ganking. So in other words, they're not just laughably rare but also laughably easy to avoid. So you're allowed to claim whatever but when I point out reality you want citations going back to the creation of the game.
You first.
Just look at the KBs for those systems and you will see what you ask for. Stop being lazy and just look a little or stop trying to pretend ignorance.
There's more ganking corps now then ever before. Especially with the code thing going on there's now many many dozens of corps dedicated to ganking miners/haulers/mission runners and more.
|

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1619
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:42:00 -
[441] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote: How is something that occurs daily in a variety of systems suddenly considered "laughably rare"??
IDK let's see, there are a little over 1,000 HiSec systems.
Most of the HiSec ganking occurs in small pockets around 2 chief systems - Amarr and Jita, since those are the major trade hubs. There is also some ganking that occurs in the pipe between them.
So let's say most ganking occurs in 20 systems, which is being generous. That's 2% of HiSec systems. Laughably rare and laughably easy to avoid.
Epic Space Cat |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20549
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:43:00 -
[442] - Quote
WTB block posts from entire corp function for the forums. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24203
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:46:00 -
[443] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:So you're allowed to claim whatever but when I point out reality you want citations going back to the creation of the game. When you invent some nonsense that goes directly against every known and recorded fact going back to the creation of the game, then yes, I want you to actually support that.
You can't, so now you will refuse to and try to shift the burden onto me.
Nope. You made the claim first, you prove it first, or you are simply wrong by default.
Quote:Just look at the KBs for those systems and you will see what you ask for. Ok. So they are laughably rare, laughably easy to avoid, and pathetically ineffective. Yes, that is indeed what I asked for. It didn't support your point though.
Quote:There's more ganking corps now then ever before. Prove it. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4421
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:51:00 -
[444] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:WTB block posts from entire corp function for the forums. Wts npc ballgags-bear sized (tear resistant). =][= |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7919
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:54:00 -
[445] - Quote
What do you mean by saying that his entire argument is grounded on something he can't possibly know let alone prove? 
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24203
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:58:00 -
[446] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Price increases are deceptive as inflation is not being taken into account. It's far cheaper to use a couple catalysts then to use the BS of old. No, it really isn't. You see, you are forgetting the simple fact that battleships were effectively free. Inflation is not even a factor at that point. You are also forgetting the simple fact that a couple of catalysts can't kill what the BS of old could kill.
So you're paying more in order to not be able to kill something any more. Yes, that definitely shows that things have become cheaper.
Quote:What vastly improved defense? Ok. If you are this unfamiliar with the changes done to almost all ships over the last two years, you have no argument any more. Surviving something as low-damaging as a rack of 1400s is silly easy these days compared to before the ship buffs. Jeez.  And that's before we even consider the new and improved methods of taking your defence on the offenceGǪ
Quote:With the addition of freighters I can just contract a gank fleet to any system I plan to hit. I just have to log in fly to the spot and start ganking. No real effort required. So in other words, nothing has changed in that regard GÇö it certainly hasn't become easier. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1620
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 18:59:00 -
[447] - Quote
Since Jan 17, 2007, ZKILL only records 700 or so Freighter losses in Uedama. That's only 100 or so per year. No way to tell how many of those are suicide ganks vs kill rights, war decs, etcetc. Epic Space Cat |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7919
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:08:00 -
[448] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Since Jan 17, 2007, ZKILL only records 700 or so Freighter losses in Uedama. That's only 100 or so per year. No way to tell how many of those are suicide ganks vs kill rights, war decs, etcetc.
That's like 1 Freighter ever 3-4 days? Tha'ts an outrage, CCP must buff freights/nerf gankers to put an end to this travesty of 1/4th a freigher death per day in Uedama!
Either that or 1/4th of an account will be unsubscribed every day in retaliation!
That's right CCP if you don't do something now, the last account with unsub from EVE 43,800 years from now! |

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4161
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:20:00 -
[449] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No. Just no. They work just as well there as they do everywhere else. Gankers, as a rule, can be shot without being concorded as it is, and they have to resort to such fragile ships to get any kind of damage output that, unlike the haulers, they are very easy to volley off the field. There's a reason why high-DPS destroyers are the ganker tool of the trade rather than any kind of volley monster. Gank destroyers have like 3900 EHP. Combined with their small size, by the time you've locked them up and destroyed them, they've already chucked out a lot of their damage. And no, they can't be shot without concord until they've started firing.
And there's a reason gankers laugh at white knights using guns, it's because they are useless. During Burn Jita, we had war targets on grid for many of our ganks and still didn't get shut down before we'd delivered most of our damage.
Tippia wrote:That's not what kill rights are for. You are confusing two completely unconnected mechanics: one is the right to not have CONCORD mess with you and another is the ability to enforce a cost on other players. Kill right right now are completely uselss. Set them too high and there's no point using them (paying 5m to shoot a 2m destroyer just makes gankers laugh a lot), set them too low, and the ganker pays it off to gank a noob ship. If a killright had to achieve the same amount of damage it caused to disappear (or the usual thirty days), they'd not be able to be removed by an alt.
Tippia wrote:No, it really isn't. Between kill rights, new crimewatch, harsher sec penalties, massively increased costs, and more mechanics to bring the fight to the gankers if they bother you, the consequences have never been higher. Sec tags makes a very minute difference to one of those things and were frankly needed to balance out the massive increases in penalties introduced over the years. None of those are even remotely consequences. Crimewatch is about the only one that's made a remote difference, but even then, it's more used to bait noobs into opening up a limited engagement. Sec penalties are cleared instantly by tags now and if controlled can be kept at a reasonable level pretty cheaply. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4161
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:25:00 -
[450] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:So the only people who shouldn't have consequences for their choices are HiSec bears? Got it. Nowhere did I say they shouldn't have consequences. Gankers do like to whine though about how they don't want any more consequences, when they have next to none, while a bear cant transport 30m in a hauler without running the risk of being ganked.
Xuixien wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I would love EVE to be a dark and gritty hardcore game, but that's really not what it is. It is. Maybe you've just gotten used to it. No, it's really not. You're delusional if you think it is.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11127
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:27:00 -
[451] - Quote
Crimewatch has made it more difficult to loot the wrecks of suicide ganked ships. You also get the same sec hit whether you fail or succeed at a gank, unlike before where your sec hit was less severe if you failed to kill the ship. Also, tags for controlling the -5><0 sec status range are expensive. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11127
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:29:00 -
[452] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Nowhere did I say they shouldn't have consequences. Gankers do like to whine though about how they don't want any more consequences, when they have next to none, while a bear cant transport 30m in a hauler without running the risk of being ganked.
So how much should CCP ratchet things up (for the umpteenth time) to make things harder for gankers? Suicide ganks are rare now. They've never made things more challenging for the bears, ever. Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1623
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:31:00 -
[453] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Nowhere did I say they shouldn't have consequences.
Your position on the matter is logically inducted via your posts and what you've said. See:
a bear cant transport 30m in a hauler without running the risk of being ganked.
Which they can, BTW, they just have to fit tank. :)
Lucas Kell wrote:No, it's really not. You're delusional if you think it is.
Present your argument then, or accept being incorrect.
Epic Space Cat |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24204
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:39:00 -
[454] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Gank destroyers have like 3900 EHP. In other words, they can be destroyed pretty much instantly by any kind of aggressive ship. Hell, even many DPS-based ships will simply volley them out of the sky (and yes, with them being gankers and all, odds are very much in favour of them being legal targets). A single Talos will be able to kill off 6GÇô7 of them before CONCORD even shows up GÇö unless that has been compensated for by the gankers (it hasn't, because it costs to much), that gank has now insta-failed.
Quote:Kill right right now are completely uselss. GǪaside from letting you ruin a ganker's day by offering free intel and making it a meaningless waste of money to buy back your sec status. As a result, they can choose between being free targets or being obivous targets.
Quote:None of those are even remotely consequences. They are all consequences. Not only that, but they are also all much harsher now than ever before. Just because you are incapable of capitalising on them does not mean they don't exist and don't work. Your incompetence is not a failure of game design or lack of game mechanics.
Quote:a bear cant transport 30m in a hauler without running the risk of being ganked. Good. That means there are actual consequences, then. Although, admittedly, the risks of being ganked if he transports that little are so vanishingly small that you might as well consider that consequence as purely theoretical. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4161
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:47:00 -
[455] - Quote
Andski wrote:So how much should CCP ratchet things up (for the umpteenth time) to make things harder for gankers? Suicide ganks are rare now. They've never made things more challenging for the bears, ever. For starters I'd make killrights relevant. And to be honest, that might even be enough. Make them stay for either the 30 days or until the a proportion of the amount has been lost to them as what they caused, and they would no longer be able to be removed by alts in rookie ships. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|

CCP Falcon
8623

|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:50:00 -
[456] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, that wasn't surprising. Thanks for confirming Eve Online has turned into Grief Online.
Suicide ganking has always been possible. Nothing's changed for 11 years.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but EVE hasn't changed in this respect. CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4161
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:56:00 -
[457] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Your position on the matter is logically inducted via your posts and what you've said. See:
a bear cant transport 30m in a hauler without running the risk of being ganked.
Which they can, BTW, they just have to fit tank. :) Erm no, your logic is incorrect. That was merely an example of how low the bar is on bear consequences. And standard haulers generally can't survived 10-15 T1 catalysts, no matter how much you tank them.
Xuixien wrote:Present your argument then, or accept being incorrect. L O L. You mean like the argument I presented when I originally said it? Vs what? You saying "Yes it is". 0/10, try harder.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2784
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 19:57:00 -
[458] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on.
Risk versus reward would mean a lot more if PvPrs risked their non-PvP mains each now and then. 
But then, as an EVE player it is your sole fault if you don't play their way and won't go away. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Dave stark
6781
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:00:00 -
[459] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. Risk versus reward would mean a lot more if PvPrs risked their non-PvP mains each now and then.  But then, as an EVE player it is your sole fault if you don't play their way and won't go away.
people who whine about people having multiple accounts are priceless.
you essentially want a random person to get punished for the actions of some one who has nothing to do with the entire situation, just because they have more than one account. it's nonsensical. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24205
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:08:00 -
[460] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:And standard haulers generally can't survived 10-15 T1 catalysts, no matter how much you tank them. Surviving 10GÇô15 catalysts in a hauler isn't particularly hard, and using 10GÇô15 catalysts means you operate at a loss if the target is carrying 30M worth of goods. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1625
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:13:00 -
[461] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Erm no, your logic is incorrect.
Nope my logic is perfectly fine. You are obviously an anti-greifer, carebear advocate. You whine about how carebears have it soooo hard, and call for stricture consequences to gankers. You never once, as far as I've read, called for stricture consequences for carebears or even advocated that carebears should take even the most rudimentary of steps to protect themselves.
Ergo, your position is fairly obvious to everyone reading.
Lucas Kell wrote:And standard haulers generally can't survived 10-15 T1 catalysts, no matter how much you tank them.
Even the most obtuse gankers aren't going to spend 100-150 million ISK worth of Catalysts to kill an IttyV carrying 30 mil of Omber.
Lucas Kell wrote:L O L. You mean like the argument I presented when I originally said it? Vs what? You saying "Yes it is". 0/10, try harder.
So you're not going to present your argument? Mmkay then.  Epic Space Cat |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1625
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:15:00 -
[462] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:And standard haulers generally can't survived 10-15 T1 catalysts, no matter how much you tank them. Surviving 10GÇô15 catalysts in a hauler isn't particularly hard, and using 10GÇô15 catalysts means you operate at a loss if the target is carrying 30M worth of goods.
This Lucas guy. He's kinda special. Epic Space Cat |

E-2C Hawkeye
State War Academy Caldari State
676
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:17:00 -
[463] - Quote
Tippia wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:I am saying there are some but not enough options to fit tank. It is so easy and cost to little to gank freighters atm that people are doing it on empty freighters for the lulz. It has never been more difficult. It has never been as rare. Costs have only ever gone up. So where on earth do you get the idea that it should be even more difficult and costly? If it's so easy and cheap, why aren't everyone doing it? Why are so few killed? Why is it so ridiculously safe to fly a freighter? Quote:Ganking should always be possible but it should come at a greater price and with greater consequences Why? Quote:not with the trivial shat we have now where alts are trained and disposed of like a revolving door. Do you have any proof whatsoever to suggest that anything even remotely like that is actually happening? Where is your proof? This is typical tippia BS same process same methods. With the changes to the ships gankers can field more dps for less cost. Gee yes things are more expensive then 5 -10 years ago but the scale of ganking to profit and ease of ganking has done nothing but gone up and gotten easier.
Yes more people are ganking not only for profit but for the lulz only because it is so cheap and because Blue-sec has very little going on
Give haulers a chance to fit better tank because shooting back wont effect the gank.
I understand the tears from the crybaby gankers. You dont want to loose your sport of clubbing baby seals on the beach.
Just like the tears from the barge changes this to shall pass. People will adapt or HTFU.
Gankers have had to easy for to long it is time for a change. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11127
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:17:00 -
[464] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:For starters I'd make killrights relevant. And to be honest, that might even be enough. Make them stay for either the 30 days or until the a proportion of the amount has been lost to them as what they caused, and they would no longer be able to be removed by alts in rookie ships.
So if you take part in a titan kill in lowsec you'll have open kill rights on you until you yourself lose a titan's worth of ships
Fantastic idea there Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Paul Maken
The Rising Stars The Initiative.
48
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:17:00 -
[465] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Nothing's changed for 11 years.
That's not true. There have been several changes.
Some made ganking harder:
1.) The change to deny insurance payout to people who get CONCORDOKKEN had a big impact. Gankers went from paying for 30% of a hull to paying for 100%, which has been an extra 30-50m in cost to the gankers depending on where the hull price has fluctuated. 2.) The recent change giving freighters low slots lets you get far more EHP than was possible previously. This both lets you move more valuable cargos safely, but it also means that the gankers need to get a ship scan of freighters as well as a cargo scan. 3.) Kill rights can now be made available/sold. It used to be that if you ganked a hauling/industrial character then the kill right they got was almost meaningless. Now, when you get a kill right on you it actually does matter.
Others have made ganking easier:
4.) The addition of the Tier 3 battlecruisers, especially the high alpha of the Tornadoes, reduced the cost of ganking with fewer larger ships until the insurance change came to balance that out. 5.) The ability to buy back security status with tags made it possible for profitable ganking to be sustained by buying tags instead of needing to spend a lot of time ratting back up above -5. This makes the loss of security status less of a penalty than it used to be.
Overall, the changes have balanced out to keep the risk/reward relationships in check. |

Bel Tika
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
306
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:19:00 -
[466] - Quote
When i like someone i dont try an change the things i dont like about them to suit my tastes, because simply put then they aint the same person i like to begin with an i wonder why they changed to somein i dont like
If you like eve why try an change it? if u dont like it why u even here? |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1625
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:21:00 -
[467] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Gee yes things are more expensive then 5 -10 years ago but the scale of ganking to profit and ease of ganking has done nothing but gone up and gotten easier.
Gank:profit ratios depends entirely on other players. It's your choice if you want to be a profitable target are not.
There is no reason to cry cry cry when the power is in your hands.
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Yes more people are ganking not only for profit but for the lulz only because it is so cheap and because Blue-sec has very little going on
- How cheap is ganking? Tell me, give me some hard numbers.
- What does "Blue-Sec" (I'm assuming you mean NullSec) have to do with it?
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Give haulers a chance to fit better tank because shooting back wont effect the gank.
CCP just recently allowed freighters to fit tank. An unprecedented move, and you're crying for "the chance to fit better tank"? Jesus! The entitlement in you people is endless.
BTW it doesn't matter how much chance you have to fit tank if you're not going to use it, so what are you crying about?
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:I understand the tears from the crybaby gankers.
The only one crying here is you.
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Just like the tears from the barge changes this to shall pass.
What tears? I did some of my best ganking after the update. Epic Space Cat |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
186
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:21:00 -
[468] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, that wasn't surprising. Thanks for confirming Eve Online has turned into Grief Online. Suicide ganking has always been possible. Nothing's changed for 11 years. Sorry to burst your bubble, but EVE hasn't changed in this respect.
In that case I think I'll create a gank alt and pop newbs running the tutorial missions. After all, CCP is not there for hand holding and players have everything they need at their disposal. |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2784
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:22:00 -
[469] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. Risk versus reward would mean a lot more if PvPrs risked their non-PvP mains each now and then.  But then, as an EVE player it is your sole fault if you don't play their way and won't go away. people who whine about people having multiple accounts are priceless. you essentially want a random person to get punished for the actions of some one who has nothing to do with the entire situation, just because they have more than one account. it's nonsensical.
I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it:
- buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck.
Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Bel Tika
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
306
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:23:00 -
[470] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, that wasn't surprising. Thanks for confirming Eve Online has turned into Grief Online. Suicide ganking has always been possible. Nothing's changed for 11 years. Sorry to burst your bubble, but EVE hasn't changed in this respect. In that case I think I'll create a gank alt and pop newbs running the tutorial missions. After all, CCP is not there for hand holding and players have everything they need at their disposal.
Read the rules, next time try no be a smart arse you just make yourself out to be a stupid count |

Dave Stark
6781
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:30:00 -
[471] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Tam Althor wrote:Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens? I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now. Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that. Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on. Risk versus reward would mean a lot more if PvPrs risked their non-PvP mains each now and then.  But then, as an EVE player it is your sole fault if you don't play their way and won't go away. people who whine about people having multiple accounts are priceless. you essentially want a random person to get punished for the actions of some one who has nothing to do with the entire situation, just because they have more than one account. it's nonsensical. I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude. 
so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one else roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right? |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2784
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:36:00 -
[472] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right?
He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Dave Stark
6781
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:42:00 -
[473] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right? He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps.
no, he's a random person that has nothing to do with your sheep. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3837
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:43:00 -
[474] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right? He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps. that's not how responsibility works
also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man |

Darkblad
Hilfe is like Free Entertainment
446
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:43:00 -
[475] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:you are aware how stupid that is, right? Mental capabilities are rarely used by those that dislike the fact that (even non consensual) pvp is part of eve in discussions like this.  EVE Infolinks -+-áOld and new-áPortraits |

Xer Jin
Ancient Anomaly and Artifacts Recovery Explorators
109
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 20:52:00 -
[476] - Quote
WOW look at all the loser crying in this thread about getting ganked i'm almost tempted to join a corp that specialize in ganking just to get in on these tears. anyone know a good corp to join. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 21:01:00 -
[477] - Quote
so many tears...
the whole cry for more tank fitting options on haulers is just silly; as the haulers that are being ganked are the ones refusing to fit tank. the problem isnt not having the ability to tank ur badger to 80k ehp, its you choosing to not fit that tank. derp |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24206
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 21:06:00 -
[478] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Where is your proof? In every patchnote from Trinity and onwards. And in the economy presentation from every Fanfest from 2008 and onwards. And on the killboards. And in dev statements. Where's yours?
Quote:the scale of ganking to profit and ease of ganking has done nothing but gone up and gotten easier. Prove it.
Quote:Give haulers a chance to fit better tank because shooting back wont effect the gank. This has already happened. Why is more needed? And how come shooting back doesn't work all of a sudden?
Angeal MacNova wrote:In that case I think I'll create a gank alt and pop newbs running the tutorial missions. Yes, please do this. Can I have your stuff? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Steppa Musana
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 21:25:00 -
[479] - Quote
Shooting back really is stupid advice, no offense to anyone who's recommended it.
Badgers can fit 70,000 EHP. Impels 800,000 EHP. RF/Push do freighter runs for dirt cheap
The only people that have a right to complain at that point are the big courier groups like RF and Push. Oh wait, they aren't complaining, because they web-warp their freighter each time a bump ship is on grid.
Let's assume you really want to fly your own freighter though. And let's assume web-warping didn't exist. Grab a Providence and fit it with deadspace armor resists. Then grab a couple buddies, or alts. Put them in a Nestor. Congrats! One of those Nestors reps enough back to counter six Talos gank ships. You have two of them. Yes, bring two minimal. If they try ganking the Nestor you need to rep it back. This is also why I said shooting back is stupid advice; that shooter is always better off having brought a Nestor to add more numbers to the logi totals.
Threads like this should be stickied, just so new players can see how absurd the notion of nerfing ganking is and how much of an advantage the gankee has. |

Ned Thomas
Angry Rockbiters M1NER CONFL1CT
129
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 21:26:00 -
[480] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Give haulers a chance to fit better tank
Screw just fitting a better tank. Go for broke. I want my Mammoth to be able to align and warp under two seconds, have an unscannable 200,000 m3 fleet hanger, +9 warp core strength, a 90% native omni resistance profile, enough base hit points to tank a fleet of smartbombing battleships, and a giant balloon in the shape of a middle finger that deploys if someone even yellowboxes it. |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1628
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 21:27:00 -
[481] - Quote
Steppa Musana wrote:Shooting back really is stupid advice, no offense to anyone who's recommended it.
Badgers can fit 70,000 EHP. Impels 800,000 EHP. RF/Push do freighter runs for dirt cheap
The only people that have a right to complain at that point are the big courier groups like RF and Push. Oh wait, they aren't complaining, because they web-warp their freighter each time a bump ship is on grid.
Let's assume you really want to fly your own freighter though. And let's assume web-warping didn't exist. Grab a Providence and fit it with deadspace armor resists. Then grab a couple buddies, or alts. Put them in a Nestor. Congrats! One of those Nestors reps enough back to counter six Talos gank ships. You have two of them.
Threads like this should be stickied, just so new players can see how absurd the notion of nerfing ganking is and how much of an advantage the gankee has.
Did you know that the humble Sigil can get 1200 passive regen on shields? Epic Space Cat |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2784
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 21:27:00 -
[482] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right? He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps. that's not how responsibility works also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man
The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.
A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.
The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Paranoid Loyd
1647
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 22:14:00 -
[483] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.
A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.
The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.
A can only force B if B allows it. Everyone is provided with the tools to mitigate risk. If you choose not to use them that is no one's fault but your own. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9210
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 22:21:00 -
[484] - Quote
This just came to my mind.
Eve online - When Carebears Attack! - Hulk (Exhumer) PvP
Isn't that guy awesome?? :D http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Hengle Teron
Mew Age Outpaws
80
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 22:29:00 -
[485] - Quote
great vid |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9331
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 22:30:00 -
[486] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.
They are, to exactly the same degree that their "victims" bother to protect themselves.
Quote: The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.
"bothering to defend yourself" is not a playstyle being "forced" on B, he should be doing it anyway if he weren't a halfassed excuse for a gamer.
Failure to do things right can and should have consequences. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Natural CloneKiller
Ukranian Hauling Co.
35
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 22:37:00 -
[487] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:You were flying a Prorator and you were not cloaked up despite hauling a contract with massive collateral.
Seriously, if you have a load like this, fly your ship like everyone is out to get you because probably that is actually the case. You had the ship to do so and still you failed. CCP already gave you everything you needed to protect yourself and you did not apply the cloak. Thus: POP!
Do you haul? |

Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
104
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:01:00 -
[488] - Quote
Quick solution, don't live in hisec. CCP RedDawn:Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty..||| CCP Goliath:I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. ||| CCP Goliath:http://goo.gl/PKGDPZ |

Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
480
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:02:00 -
[489] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction. 
I liked your comments until here. That is not risk. It's a loss, but it's not risk. It's about as 'risky' as blowing someone up when you haven't scanned their cargo. The point was that ganking ships are so cheap, losing a dozen of them makes zero difference. Your response does not address that in the slightest.
Try again. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24210
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:06:00 -
[490] - Quote
Dorian Wylde wrote:I liked your comments until here. That is not risk. It's a loss, but it's not risk. Uhm. Yes, that's what risks are: the chance of a loss.
Quote:It's about as 'risky' as blowing someone up when you haven't scanned their cargo. No, it's not. The loot fairy does not care about scanners GÇö she just punishes you with Meta-3 hardeners when you're praying for a deadspace booster.
Quote:The point was that ganking ships are so cheap, losing a dozen of them makes zero difference. Your response does not address that in the slightest. The point rested on a thoroughly flawed notion of what risk actually is. His response addressed it by describing the risk involved. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Zappity
S U P R E M E - M A T H E M A T I C S A Band Apart.
1314
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:06:00 -
[491] - Quote
I would love to see a well functioning bounty system. It would be nice if bounty hunting was a viable profession. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
6229
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:11:00 -
[492] - Quote
My only regret is that I have but only one bucket to give: a++ püñ Gùò_Gùò a++püñ a¦Ñ_a¦Ñ
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'Hodor'. |

Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
162
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:31:00 -
[493] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right? He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps. that's not how responsibility works also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims. A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog. The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.
I like to play a version of monopoly where only I can build hotels and my opponents can not. Unfortunately for me that version doesn't exist ... just as your preferred version of EvE doesn't. You have to do with the version that does.
|

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11369
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 23:58:00 -
[494] - Quote
I've hauled loads implants worth 2+ billion in and out of Jita multiple times, in T1 industrials. I've never been ganked because I don't give anyone the opportunity to cargo scan me. Enjoying the rain today? ;) |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11369
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:01:00 -
[495] - Quote
And LOL at getting ganked in a Prorator. Enjoying the rain today? ;) |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1631
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:10:00 -
[496] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:I you roll over my sheep with your armored truck, I can do two things about it: - buy myself an armored truck and blow yours - bring some pesticide and poison all sheeps in your brother's farm as he was who paid for your truck. Your sheeps for my sheeps, dude.  so you'd go and murder some random person's sheep because some one roadkilled one of yours? you are aware how stupid that is, right? He's not a random person. He's the guy who pays your bills. Your sheeps for my sheeps. that's not how responsibility works also what is this line of conversation even about this is the only post in this thread i've cared to read besides falcon's which are beautiful posts made by a beautiful man The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims. A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog. The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it.
I read that crappy blog and it's garbage. No one is forcing you not to run missions or not haul 10 billion ISK worth of stuff in an untanked Iteron V.
Also, failing to grasp the basic premise of EVE Online: You and that author are doing that.
Epic Space Cat |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5395
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:43:00 -
[497] - Quote
Paul Maken wrote:4.) The addition of the Tier 3 battlecruisers, especially the high alpha of the Tornadoes, reduced the cost of ganking with fewer larger ships until the insurance change came to balance that out.
*cough*Samepatch*cough* *cough*theywerestillmoreexpensivethanprepatchbsganking*cough*
In other words, there has been exactly one patch that buffed ganking, and all that did was allow gankers to spend ISK instead of time if they wanted the convenience of not being -10. (You can gank just fine as a -10)
Quote:Overall, the changes have balanced out to keep the risk/reward relationships in check.
You forgot a whole lot on your list of nerfs to ganking. Starting with the biggest and first one:
CONCORD stopped being tankable. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |
|

CCP Falcon
8642

|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:44:00 -
[498] - Quote
Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again.
Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. 
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5395
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:47:00 -
[499] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. 
Never let the facts interfere with telling a good story.
I feel like I've been saying this a lot recently. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Foxstar Damaskeenus
Soul Takers
184
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:57:00 -
[500] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote: The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
Congradulations Luukje and NaturalCloneKiller |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9333
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:57:00 -
[501] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. 
[ ] Rekt
[ ] Not Rekt
[x] Falcon Punched "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4163
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 01:20:00 -
[502] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:And standard haulers generally can't survived 10-15 T1 catalysts, no matter how much you tank them. Surviving 10GÇô15 catalysts in a hauler isn't particularly hard, and using 10GÇô15 catalysts means you operate at a loss if the target is carrying 30M worth of goods. Depends on if they are going for loot or a green killboard and tears. And no, a standard hauler, as in not a freighter, is not going to be surviving that many catalysts. It would be a push to survive 5, which would even be green on the loot side too.
Xuixien wrote:Nope my logic is perfectly fine. You are obviously an anti-greifer, carebear advocate. You whine about how carebears have it soooo hard, and call for more strict consequences to gankers. You never once, as far as I've read, called for harsher consequences for carebears or even advocated that carebears should take even the most rudimentary of steps to protect themselves.
Ergo, your position is fairly obvious to everyone reading. Wrong. Try not trolling so much. Basically you disagree with me, so rather than come up with something sensible to say you are going to attack me, call me a carebear lover, and blah blah blah, the usual tears of someone with the inability to communicate. If you read what I actually wrote, you''d realise you were talking out of your ass. Either way, I'm not arguing this point with you. Troll elsewhere.
Xuixien wrote:Even the most obtuse gankers aren't going to spend 100-150 million ISK worth of Catalysts to kill an IttyV carrying 30 mil of Omber. Where are you buying your T1 catalysts for 10m a pop? 2.5m tops, and that's if you can't be bothered to wait of buy orders. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4163
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 01:24:00 -
[503] - Quote
Andski wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:For starters I'd make killrights relevant. And to be honest, that might even be enough. Make them stay for either the 30 days or until the a proportion of the amount has been lost to them as what they caused, and they would no longer be able to be removed by alts in rookie ships. So if you take part in a titan kill in lowsec you'll have open kill rights on you until you yourself lose a titan's worth of ships Fantastic idea there Or 30 days. And as far as I know you only get killrights for pods in lowsec, not for ships, so no. Also I said a proportion. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5397
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 02:30:00 -
[504] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Depends on if they are going for loot or a green killboard and tears. And no, a standard hauler, as in not a freighter, is not going to be surviving that many catalysts. It would be a push to survive 5, which would even be green on the loot side too.
If someone's willing to **** money away to kill your ship, maybe you should avoid annoying people?
Quote:Xuixien wrote:Even the most obtuse gankers aren't going to spend 100-150 million ISK worth of Catalysts to kill an IttyV carrying 30 mil of Omber. Where are you buying your T1 catalysts for 10m a pop? 2.5m tops, and that's if you can't be bothered to wait of buy orders.
T1 Catalysts cost you in a much more important area. Manpower. Which is why T2 Catas and larger ships are so popular with gankers.
First two Freighter Ganks on zkill have more than 50% of their damage done by ships bigger than Catalysts. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2784
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 08:24:00 -
[505] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.
A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.
The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it. A can only force B if B allows it. Everyone is provided with the tools to mitigate risk. If you choose not to use them that is no one's fault but your own.
People answer to incentives.
In EVE, people who don't mess with anyone are incentivized to leave the game, whereas people who mess with others never are incentivized to leave the game.
IMHO, that's wrong.
CCP completely dissents.
There really isn't much more to say. -»\(-¦_-¦)/-» The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9234
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 08:56:00 -
[506] - Quote
Modern society created weaklings who have stopped understanding that being able tk protect ones self is of utter most importance.
Instead people obey to a protective authority. http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9351
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:13:00 -
[507] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: In EVE, people who don't mess with anyone are incentivized to leave the game, whereas people who mess with others never are incentivized to leave the game.
You have that wrong. People who don't mess with anyone are not the issue.
People who refuse to take responsibility for their own defense are incentivized to leave the game.
And that's just fine.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2785
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:13:00 -
[508] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Modern society created weaklings who have stopped understanding that being able tk protect ones self is of utter most importance.
Instead people obey to a protective authority.
The whole art of civilization is to set layers between violence and the individual. That allows those who can't protect themselves to make it alive through deadly perils such as being a child and going to school in some countries.
In EVE, everybody is armed and nobody is safe. RL is the same but with irreversible consequences. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3837
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:14:00 -
[509] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:In EVE, people who don't mess with anyone are incentivized to leave the game, whereas people who mess with others never are incentivized to leave the game. false |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2785
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:20:00 -
[510] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:In EVE, people who don't mess with anyone are incentivized to leave the game, whereas people who mess with others never are incentivized to leave the game. false
There are two statements, which one you call false and why? The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3837
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:24:00 -
[511] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:In EVE, people who don't mess with anyone are incentivized to leave the game, whereas people who mess with others never are incentivized to leave the game. false There are two statements, which one you call false and why? there are two statements, both presented without reasoning and both of which are false |

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9234
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:28:00 -
[512] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Modern society created weaklings who have stopped understanding that being able tk protect ones self is of utter most importance.
Instead people obey to a protective authority. The whole art of civilization is to set layers between violence and the individual. That allows those who can't protect themselves to make it alive through deadly perils such as being a child and going to school in some countries. In EVE, everybody is armed and nobody is safe. RL is the same but with irreversible consequences. While this being true, it is irrelevant to the matter of the game.
I repeat...
Society creates weaklings who forgot that it is of utter most importance to protect ones self.
This got so bad, that people even do not want to protect themselves in a game.
Remember... this is a game.
Proof of this point can be seen on the forums, including this thread.
What's sad, is that each new generation will cry more for protection of said authority, because they are used to said protection and every new blow to their perceived security will make them cry for even more protection.
Matters of facts, as can be seen in real life. Real people play this game!
Opinions on the matter are irrelevant.
What's reality can be seen on the forums, almost daily. http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3837
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:31:00 -
[513] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.
A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.
The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it. pvpers who disrupt the pve activities of others are already exposed to having their own activities disrupted
the game is entirely fair in that regard. each player is on an even footing, you see. people who pvp aren't handed additional tools. people who refuse the tools handed to them are at a disadvantage only due to their own choices
i'm going to type the phrase 'deal with it' followed by the emoticon wearing shades |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3837
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:32:00 -
[514] - Quote
deal with it  |

Jenni LaCroix
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:52:00 -
[515] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
Ever heard of Concord?
Yes, there is protection in high sec, but sometimes some people are the poor ones. They get chosen to be terminated. Me for example, I blow up every single leopard shuttle there is. I love to insta-blap someone plus they carry some nice stuff in it often.
|

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9238
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 10:20:00 -
[516] - Quote
A huge misunderstanding comes from the idea that CONCORD provides protection.
They do not.
At all.
They come and kick my ass either before ... ... or after the job is done ... ... but either way I already started engaging.
They do not provide protection ... ... as they do not prevent me from attacking anyone.
"Protection" means that someone is preventing harm from being done.
CONCORD punishes ... but does not protect. http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 10:44:00 -
[517] - Quote
The funny thing remains, that all these cries for more tank protection and what not, are coming from players who dont understand how to tank their ships or which tools in addition they have to get themselves safe. Instead of crying for more protection, invest some time into learning the game mechanics you can use to ur own advantage, stop being lazy.
|

Sidrat Flush
Deadly Harmony
190
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 10:51:00 -
[518] - Quote
Interesting angle this conversation has turned towards.
That of the perception of protection and feeling safe will require more and more steps as people over come the perceived barrier.
While Concord does not provide protection, merely consequences, those who fail to understand this fine distinction will be calling for more and more steps until we're taken over by robots and can't undock or buy things from the market without going through several pop up warning screens to ensure this is actually what we want to do and can fathom the possible dangers of our actions.
Eve is ten years old, and it's always had a divide between player styles, those that merely want to build and create; and those that don't enjoy spreadsheets who just want to attack stuff in a pvp game.
Neither side is wrong per se. The anti-pvp side fail to appreciate the team work, communication and time spent in order to pull off a successful attack - profit in ISK or tears, if the anti-pvp crowd fail to provide both, perhaps they won't be targeted as often? The anti-spreadsheet, combat side under appreciates the time, team work and effort it requires to set up and keep a supply chain going.
Of course the previous paragraph was a total generalisation and wrong for so many people who actually do both and appreciates both for what they are.
I think we as players should step out of our comfort zone more often. Do something against our nature, in order to understand 'the enemy' and become better at our primary focus in the game.
Its time to stand up against the bad empire based CEO telling falsehoods about what new characters can accomplish and pushing them towards an in game experience of drudgery and loneliness keeping them in the shadow of ignorance for at nest their own profit at worse apathy towards all the experiences that Eve has to offer. |

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
580
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 11:13:00 -
[519] - Quote
Sidrat Flush wrote: Interesting angle this conversation has turned towards.
That of the perception of protection and feeling safe will require more and more steps as people over come the perceived barrier.
While Concord does not provide protection, merely consequences, those who fail to understand this fine distinction will be calling for more and more steps until we're taken over by robots and can't undock or buy things from the market without going through several pop up warning screens to ensure this is actually what we want to do and can fathom the possible dangers of our actions.
Eve is ten years old, and it's always had a divide between player styles, those that merely want to build and create; and those that don't enjoy spreadsheets who just want to attack stuff in a pvp game.
Neither side is wrong per se. The anti-pvp side fail to appreciate the team work, communication and time spent in order to pull off a successful attack - profit in ISK or tears, if the anti-pvp crowd fail to provide both, perhaps they won't be targeted as often? The anti-spreadsheet, combat side under appreciates the time, team work and effort it requires to set up and keep a supply chain going.
Of course the previous paragraph was a total generalisation and wrong for so many people who actually do both and appreciates both for what they are.
I think we as players should step out of our comfort zone more often. Do something against our nature, in order to understand 'the enemy' and become better at our primary focus in the game.
I'm not sure about that because they already got what they wanted twice, first for barges then for freighters, yet if any thing the whining has simply gotten worse. Forgive me for not wanting to talk to people who never have anything new to say. Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin
you're welcome |

Solecist Project
Mew Age Outpaws
9241
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 11:18:00 -
[520] - Quote
Sidrat Flush wrote:That of the perception of protection and feeling safe will require more and more steps as people over come the perceived barrier ... will be calling for more and more steps until ... [police state] ... can't [freedom] without going through [bureaucracy] to ensure [safety]
I felt free to sum up your post ... ... which makes it applicable to both ingame- and actual reality. http://residentoutlaw.tumblr.com - Mew Age Calendar YC116.08.27 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=369961 |

Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1646
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 13:39:00 -
[521] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:And standard haulers generally can't survived 10-15 T1 catalysts,
They can survive them by not making themselves a target for them. Don't haul more than the Catalysts are worth.
Lucas Kell wrote:Depends on if they are going for loot or a green killboard and tears.
Not really. You'd be hard pressed to recruit 15 people in Catalysts to kill a T1 hauler carrying 30m of stuff. At that amount of Catalysts you might as well gank an Orca worth 800m.
Lucas Kell wrote:And no, a standard hauler, as in not a freighter
I was not aware that freighters were non-standard hauling ships. Are freighters used for something else?
Lucas Kell wrote:Wrong. Try not trolling so much. Basically you disagree with me, so rather than come up with something sensible to say you are going to attack me, call me a carebear lover, and blah blah blah, the usual tears of someone with the inability to communicate. If you read what I actually wrote, you''d realise you were talking out of your ass. Either way, I'm not arguing this point with you. Troll elsewhere.
What a compelling argument! Except not, because it's just a bunch of insults.
Lucas Kell wrote:Where are you buying your T1 catalysts for 10m a pop? 2.5m tops, and that's if you can't be bothered to wait of buy orders.
Sorry, but you just said "Catalyst", you never defined T1 or T2 so I went and did that for you. :)
Epic Space Cat |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12878
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 14:31:00 -
[522] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Sidrat Flush wrote:That of the perception of protection and feeling safe will require more and more steps as people over come the perceived barrier ... will be calling for more and more steps until ... [police state] ... can't [freedom] without going through [bureaucracy] to ensure [safety] I felt free to sum up your post ... ... which makes it applicable to both ingame- and actual reality.
You have snakes in your hair. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Angeal MacNova
LankTech
186
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 14:54:00 -
[523] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Modern society created weaklings who have stopped understanding that being able tk protect ones self is of utter most importance.
Instead people obey to a protective authority. The whole art of civilization is to set layers between violence and the individual. That allows those who can't protect themselves to make it alive through deadly perils such as being a child and going to school in some countries.
Wow. For Solecist to state such a thing about the real world. It's people who think like that that is wrong with the world today.
Well said Indahmawar. Well said.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24221
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 14:55:00 -
[524] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Depends on if they are going for loot or a green killboard and tears. And no, a standard hauler, as in not a freighter, is not going to be surviving that many catalysts. It would be a push to survive 5, which would even be green on the loot side too. No, it doesn't really depend on either of that GÇö it's a loss. 30M in carried loot does not make up for the loss of 10GÇô15 destroyers. And freigthers are standard haulers. As are DSTs and BRs. A non-standard hauler would be a covops or an interceptor or maybe a Damnation. If you want to say GÇ£T1 industrialGÇ¥ then say GÇ£T1 industrialGÇ¥ GÇö they're not the only haulers around.
And funnily enough, if they were going for tears, 15 people on a 30M target GÇö especially if it's a T1 indy GÇö is even less likely because no-one is going to cry over that amount. It's not something that the 15 people sitting around will be interested in.
Quote:Where are you buying your T1 catalysts for 10m a pop? 2.5m tops, and that's if you can't be bothered to wait of buy orders Standard T2 fit arrives at roughly that price. For 2.5M tops, you're not even going to scratch the paint on many haulers.
GǪoh, and Ruby points out, the main cost here is actually the 3GÇô4 mahours that go into that gank (and that's not even counting the waiting around for a worth-while target to appear). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3843
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 16:11:00 -
[525] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:The serous point is that PvPrs who disrupt the non-PvP activities of players who don't engage in PvP should be exposed to have their own non-PvP acitvities disrupted by their victims.
A extreme and funny example was given by Mike Azariah in his "Peace dec" blog.
The whole risk vs reward is biased since A can force his playstyle on B but B can't force his play style on A, so B must either play as A does or quit the game. That's barely an equitable choice, but CCP are OK with it. pvpers who disrupt the pve activities of others are already exposed to having their own activities disrupted the game is entirely fair in that regard. each player is on an even footing, you see. people who pvp aren't handed additional tools. people who refuse the tools handed to them are at a disadvantage only due to their own choices i'm going to type the phrase 'deal with it' followed by the emoticon wearing shades let's put it another way. there are two hypothetical players. the first chooses to embrace all the tools provided them by the game. let's call this player the absurdly courageous space hero, paragon of virtue and morality, ruler of all those in optimal range, or ACSHPVMRATOR for short
actually i'll just end the post here because i'm tired. let's just assume i finished the hypothetical and it was fantastic. if someone can modify the title of the courageous space hero so that it ends with -RAPTOR that'd be badass thanks |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5406
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 17:40:00 -
[526] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: let's put it another way. there are two hypothetical players. the first chooses to embrace all the tools provided them by the game. let's call this player the absurdly courageous space hero, paragon of virtue and morality, ruler of all those in optimal range, or ACSHPVMRATOR for short
actually i'll just end the post here because i'm tired. let's just assume i finished the hypothetical and it was fantastic. if someone can modify the title of the courageous space hero so that it ends with -RAPTOR that'd be badass thanks
absurdly courageous space hero, paragon of virtue and morality, ruler of all those players traveling in optimal range
ACSHPVMRAPTOR "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Niko Thiesman
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 18:59:00 -
[527] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Since I've been doing a lot of bumping lately, I am going to rename my Stabber "Falcon Punch".
You know, since it knocks you out of bounds.
Reminds me of Super Smash Brothers. lol
People need to stop whining about CODE and gankers. People also need to stop paying "mining dues". CODE is nothing more than a bunch of people pretending they have a right to tell people how to play. Just fit your ships properly, fly with friends, and ignore CODE. They are good for nothing except a good fireworks show, occasionally. It's just too bad they won't PvP and they chicken out of REAL fights.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2dtert/rvb_best_ban_ever_catalyst_vs_code_code_forfeits/
I do agree with CODE on one point though, If you just let your ship sit there and go AFK or something you are just asking to be podded.
|

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
464
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 19:13:00 -
[528] - Quote
implants are itchy.
|

Niko Thiesman
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 19:19:00 -
[529] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:implants are itchy.
Mine too. Guess it's time to go PvP until I get podded, then get the level 5's. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20568
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:00:00 -
[530] - Quote
Niko Thiesman wrote: People need to stop whining about CODE and gankers. People also need to stop paying "mining dues". CODE calling mining without permits "illegal" is just plain stupid. CODE is not a legal entity of any kind. CODE is nothing more than a bunch of people pretending they have a right to tell people how to play.
It's an extortion racket, and it's within the rules of the game to run such an enterprise, they appear to have the muscle to enforce it to a certain extent too.
Quote:Just fit your ships properly, fly with friends, and ignore CODE. I agree with points 1 and 2, but ignoring them is not an option, it may end in an explosion or 3, acknowledging that they exist and planning around them is the way to go
Quote:They are good for nothing except a good fireworks show, occasionally. I don't know about that, the amount of tears they generate is astounding.
Quote:It's just too bad they won't PvP and they chicken out of REAL fights. If it involves another player it's PvP, as for real fights you need to define that, as I'm pretty sure they roam in lowsec and nullsec and kill people there too, when they're not enforcing their extortion racket.
Quote:I do agree with CODE on one point though, If you just let your ship sit there and go AFK or something you are just asking to be podded. Totally. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
468
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:18:00 -
[531] - Quote
Confessions of an erratic and usually inebriated mind.... I want Tippia to bear my space babies, as Kurosaki Rukia has given me the cold shoulder. The children would be highly intelligent, completely rational, and hell bent upon reforming the universe through force. Jonah Gravenstein should come over to the darkside and become an inquisitor of HTFU. He knows it to be true, but still has yet to admit it to himself. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20569
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:21:00 -
[532] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Jonah Gravenstein should come over to the darkside and become an inquisitor of HTFU. He knows it to be true, but still has yet to admit it to himself. lol I actually spoke to Ralph about this the other day, seriously considering putting an alt in with you guys. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
468
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:23:00 -
[533] - Quote
I took the big leap and put my main (me) in. I have yet to feel any sense of regret, and it's revitalized my love for this game.
Edit: I've been told we have cookies, I have yet to see one. On the other hand I get to fight against rediculous ships with equally rediculous results... such as https://zkillboard.com/kill/40530236/ |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20570
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:26:00 -
[534] - Quote
I would but while this character can do many things it can do none of them well, my alt is far more combat oriented.
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Edit: I've been told we have cookies, I have yet to see one. It's the dark side, of course you were lied to about the cookies, you have to loot them for yourself. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
474
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:44:00 -
[535] - Quote
I do have plenty of Damsels and slaves, to be fair. |

virm pasuul
Mine 'N' Refine Yulai Federation
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 20:59:00 -
[536] - Quote
Falcon you are my new hero :) Thank you for restoring my faith in CCP.
One argument that I never see the care bears never address is this:
It takes a lot of gankers to pull off the larger ganks. That means coordinating quite a few pilots to work together. Why don't gank targets bring along an ECM friend or two to disrupt the ganks? One mediocre ECM pilot e.g. a Griffin pilot cancels out two ganker pilots. You only have to get half as many - realistically 1/3 or less - ECM friends working together to completely negate the gank. And the gankers still loose their ships.
If you are going to use resource comparisons as an argument that ganking is unbalanced you have to consider the number of people and pilots involved on each side of the gank. Any comparison this ignores this aspect is without foundation and in my opinion ( deliberately ) intellectually dishonest. |

Lugh Crow-Slave
Guardians of the Morrigan
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:05:00 -
[537] - Quote
virm pasuul wrote:Falcon you are my new hero :) Thank you for restoring my faith in CCP.
One argument that I never see the care bears never address is this:
It takes a lot of gankers to pull off the larger ganks. That means coordinating quite a few pilots to work together. Why don't gank targets bring along an ECM friend or two to disrupt the ganks? One mediocre ECM pilot e.g. a Griffin pilot cancels out two ganker pilots. You only have to get half as many - realistically 1/3 or less - ECM friends working together to completely negate the gank. And the gankers still loose their ships.
If you are going to use resource comparisons as an argument that ganking is unbalanced you have to consider the number of people and pilots involved on each side of the gank. Any comparison this ignores this aspect is without foundation and in my opinion ( deliberately ) intellectually dishonest.
But how can i do this afk? its just not fair. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5410
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:06:00 -
[538] - Quote
virm pasuul wrote:If you are going to use resource comparisons as an argument that ganking is unbalanced you have to consider the number of people and pilots involved on each side of the gank. Any comparison this ignores this aspect is without foundation and in my opinion ( deliberately ) intellectually dishonest.
Friends are overpowered. Nerf Friends. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20574
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:23:00 -
[539] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Friends are overpowered. Nerf Friends. They're not as overpowered as avarice, stupidity and incompetence  The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2794
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:37:00 -
[540] - Quote
virm pasuul wrote:Falcon you are my new hero :) Thank you for restoring my faith in CCP.
One argument that I never see the care bears never address is this:
It takes a lot of gankers to pull off the larger ganks. That means coordinating quite a few pilots to work together. Why don't gank targets bring along an ECM friend or two to disrupt the ganks? One mediocre ECM pilot e.g. a Griffin pilot cancels out two ganker pilots. You only have to get half as many - realistically 1/3 or less - ECM friends working together to completely negate the gank. And the gankers still loose their ships.
If you are going to use resource comparisons as an argument that ganking is unbalanced you have to consider the number of people and pilots involved on each side of the gank. Any comparison this ignores this aspect is without foundation and in my opinion ( deliberately ) intellectually dishonest.
Would you spend all your play time escorting someone day after day so you can ECM boost him when he needs it, maybe once in six months?
If the answer is "yes", CCP should hire you, you're the kind of sucker they're looking for when they ask players to bring friends to each and every non-PvP activity. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

virm pasuul
Mine 'N' Refine Yulai Federation
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:44:00 -
[541] - Quote
I've got news for you. Everything in Eve is PVP, even the "non PVP" stuff. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3846
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:46:00 -
[542] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Benny Ohu wrote: let's put it another way. there are two hypothetical players. the first chooses to embrace all the tools provided them by the game. let's call this player the absurdly courageous space hero, paragon of virtue and morality, ruler of all those in optimal range, or ACSHPVMRATOR for short
actually i'll just end the post here because i'm tired. let's just assume i finished the hypothetical and it was fantastic. if someone can modify the title of the courageous space hero so that it ends with -RAPTOR that'd be badass thanks
absurdly courageous space hero, paragon of virtue and morality, ruler of all those players traveling in optimal range ACSHPVMRAPTOR this is excellent as it can now be pronounced properly as ack-sh'p-voom-RAPTOR which is every bit as badass as predicted
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Would you spend all your play time escorting someone day after day so you can ECM boost him when he needs it, maybe once in six months? If the answer is "yes", CCP should hire you, you're the kind of sucker they're looking for when they ask players to bring friends to each and every non-PvP activity.
are you saying you're not as committed to expending as much effort on not getting ganked as a murder of ack-sh'p-voom-RAPTORs are prepared to expend to gank you |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7941
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:47:00 -
[543] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:virm pasuul wrote:Falcon you are my new hero :) Thank you for restoring my faith in CCP.
One argument that I never see the care bears never address is this:
It takes a lot of gankers to pull off the larger ganks. That means coordinating quite a few pilots to work together. Why don't gank targets bring along an ECM friend or two to disrupt the ganks? One mediocre ECM pilot e.g. a Griffin pilot cancels out two ganker pilots. You only have to get half as many - realistically 1/3 or less - ECM friends working together to completely negate the gank. And the gankers still loose their ships.
If you are going to use resource comparisons as an argument that ganking is unbalanced you have to consider the number of people and pilots involved on each side of the gank. Any comparison this ignores this aspect is without foundation and in my opinion ( deliberately ) intellectually dishonest. Would you spend all your play time escorting someone day after day so you can ECM boost him when he needs it, maybe once in six months? If the answer is "yes", CCP should hire you, you're the kind of sucker they're looking for when they ask players to bring friends to each and every non-PvP activity.
Translation: "Can't be arsed, CCP please fix the game to defend carebears from something that might happen once in 6 months"
|

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7941
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:49:00 -
[544] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:
are you saying you're not as commited to expending as much effort on not getting ganked as a murder of ack-sh'p-voom-RAPTORs are prepared to expend to gank you
That's exactly what he's saying, which is par for the course for the kinds of folks we're talking about. The idea of playing a game is absurd to them, they honestly expect the developer to hand them an unfair advantage. |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
9329
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:49:00 -
[545] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Would you spend all your play time escorting someone day after day so you can ECM boost him when he needs it, maybe once in six months?
If the answer is "yes", CCP should hire you, you're the kind of sucker they're looking for when they ask players to bring friends to each and every non-PvP activity.
Hi Indah, not sure about your overall views but I'm responding just to your post here.
What you are describing is a known limitation to the amount of fun you can have as an escort, or a gank sabotager (note my clever use of avoiding a tired buzz word).
However, if there is the occasional shipment where the cargo is absurdly valuable, I think it makes sense to have a friend along to help you. I think webbing or scouting is a better investment than ECM or Logi.. but there are many strategies.
Also, "maybe once in six months" is an acceptable fail rate as a player in an MMO isn't it? We should all be so lucky to die ingloriously just twice a year.. ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Paranoid Loyd
1659
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 21:49:00 -
[546] - Quote
Heh, admits how exceedingly rare it is, yet still wants fix.  "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
477
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:00:00 -
[547] - Quote
well you know... because of the children. And stuff. Did I mention children? Do it for the bears goddammit! They need to afk in peace, not pieces. It's absolutely absurd that they should have to put forth the rediculous amounts of effort needed to provide the necessary security to allow them to safely autopilot to their various destinations without fear of GREIFERS coming to RUIN thier enjoyment of the game they would be playing if they were'nt so busy watching netflix or any of the various other video channels that are far more important than watching to make sure their cargo arrives intact! Anyone interfering with the timely and profitable delivery of their AFK cargo is obviously a basement dwelling sociopath who exists solely to ruin the game for their fellow players, and is in on the vast conspiracy to kill EVE due to AFK players unsubscribing. EVE IS DYING, PLZ HALP.
There, did I do that right? Do we need another take? |

virm pasuul
Mine 'N' Refine Yulai Federation
153
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:04:00 -
[548] - Quote
I think you nailed it first go. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24222
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:05:00 -
[549] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Would you spend all your play time escorting someone day after day so you can ECM boost him when he needs it, maybe once in six months? If it's as common as the whiners consistently fail to demonstrate, then it should definitely be worth-while. After all, it's no different than spending time sitting in a station or at a safe in space, waiting for hours for your scout to find a good target that is headed your way.
But if it's as rare as once in six months that you even get any kind of reason to perhaps do something, then there's simply nothing that even remotely resembles something that, after a bottle of booze and after having lost your glasses on your way to (what you hoped were) the toilet, might be confused with a problem-lookalike. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20574
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:07:00 -
[550] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:well you know... because of the children. And stuff. Did I mention children? Do it for the bears goddammit! They need to afk in peace, not pieces. It's absolutely absurd that they should have to put forth the rediculous amounts of effort needed to provide the necessary security to allow them to safely autopilot to their various destinations without fear of GREIFERS coming to RUIN thier enjoyment of the game they would be playing if they were'nt so busy watching netflix or any of the various other video channels that are far more important than watching to make sure their cargo arrives intact! Anyone interfering with the timely and profitable delivery of their AFK cargo is obviously a basement dwelling sociopath who exists solely to ruin the game for their fellow players, and is in on the vast conspiracy to kill EVE due to AFK players unsubscribing. EVE IS DYING, PLZ HALP.
There, did I do that right? Do we need another take? This is why the forum needs sarcasm tags/font. Some poor deluded carebear is going to take this seriously. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Lugh Crow-Slave
Guardians of the Morrigan
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:11:00 -
[551] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Omar Alharazaad wrote:well you know... because of the children. And stuff. Did I mention children? Do it for the bears goddammit! They need to afk in peace, not pieces. It's absolutely absurd that they should have to put forth the rediculous amounts of effort needed to provide the necessary security to allow them to safely autopilot to their various destinations without fear of GREIFERS coming to RUIN thier enjoyment of the game they would be playing if they were'nt so busy watching netflix or any of the various other video channels that are far more important than watching to make sure their cargo arrives intact! Anyone interfering with the timely and profitable delivery of their AFK cargo is obviously a basement dwelling sociopath who exists solely to ruin the game for their fellow players, and is in on the vast conspiracy to kill EVE due to AFK players unsubscribing. EVE IS DYING, PLZ HALP.
There, did I do that right? Do we need another take? This is why the forum needs sarcasm tags/font. Some poor deluded carebear is going to take this seriously.
They still would anyway they seem to have trouble seeing things from any other view point |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
478
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:28:00 -
[552] - Quote
I'd be sorry if it weren't for the fact that reason doesn't work. Calm instruction doesn't work. Sympathetic nods and suggestions of how to not have it happen again doesn't work. Devs coming in and stating flat out that their approach doesn't work, doesn't work. Some people you simply cannot reach, no matter how hard you try. Eventually you stop trying and become the bittervet that they all claim to be the root of the problem. No longer can you reach them en masse, so now your only recourse is to try to reach them individually. Through violence. Strangely enough this seems to work more in game than it does on the forums, as anonymous forum alt #523155 cannot experience the sudden loss of their battlecruiser, nor can they comprehend the means they could have employed to prevent the sudden loss of 60-150 odd million in ship and modules, whereas random bear #125459 can, especially once it's been spelled out to them. |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2794
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:36:00 -
[553] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Would you spend all your play time escorting someone day after day so you can ECM boost him when he needs it, maybe once in six months?
If the answer is "yes", CCP should hire you, you're the kind of sucker they're looking for when they ask players to bring friends to each and every non-PvP activity.
Hi Indah, not sure about your overall views but I'm responding just to your post here. What you are describing is a known limitation to the amount of fun you can have as an escort, or a gank sabotager (note my clever use of avoiding a tired buzz word). However, if there is the occasional shipment where the cargo is absurdly valuable, I think it makes sense to have a friend along to help you. I think webbing or scouting is a better investment than ECM or Logi.. but there are many strategies. Also, "maybe once in six months" is an acceptable fail rate as a player in an MMO isn't it? We should all be so lucky to die ingloriously just twice a year..
See, I don't know how often happen ganks.
The point is that defending another player would be very boring when he wasn't attacked, which as far as i know, it's the most usual occurence ingame. Most of the time most of the players are not ganked, hence the "once in six months" reference.
One of my pet concepts is that players should be allowed to use NPC for tasks whose opportunity cost is too high for a human player. Say, bringing NPC anti-gank right when you need it, for a price that compensates the loss inflicted on gankers. Would you spend a 500 millon one-shot NPC anti-gank to laugh at a flight of ganknados? Would you gank if you knew that X is known for using NPC anti-ganks? (These are rhetorical questions, btw)
Anyway, this is just a stupid debate since the start. CCP doesn't wants a game different than it is now. And if they could make a better game, they would be making it.  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
479
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:46:00 -
[554] - Quote
Defending another player IS very boring if you're not certain they are likely to be attacked. Scouting out a route and checking to see how dangerous it is via the various tools available is much easier. Bringing NPC's into the equation isn't really part of CCP's style, nor is it in line with how the game generally runs. Players defend against players, and more often than not that defense doesn't occur in the form of guns or ewar, it happens in the form of awareness and information gathering. It's MUCH easier to survive a trap that you never step foot into it than to try to plunge headfirst into one that you know is there. Let someone else try to tank the lawnmower, while you skirt around it and get to your destination. A scout is more useful than ewar and logi when it comes to this... just knowing where the trap is gives you a major advantage when it comes to not being violenced by it. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5415
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:48:00 -
[555] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:The point is that defending another player would be very boring when he wasn't attacked, which as far as i know, it's the most usual occurence ingame. Most of the time most of the players are not ganked, hence the "once in six months" reference.
People in EVE do huge amounts of boring things if the reward is high enough. Believe me, I ran a Jump Freighter service.
If HS haulers are unwilling to do this, either they believe that the reward isn't high enough (i.e. ganking is too rare to be bothered), or they're stupid. Especially since it only takes 1 friend or alt to keep you safe from any sized gank fleet.
Anyway, if nobody attempts to gank you because you're protected, OP ******* Successful. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20574
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:55:00 -
[556] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:[If HS haulers are unwilling to do this, either they believe that the reward isn't high enough (i.e. ganking is too rare to be bothered), or they're stupid. Especially since it only takes 1 friend or alt to keep you safe from any sized gank fleet. They've also got the option of 3rd party haulers, set the collateral right and it's a win (isk wise) regardless of whether or not the load actually gets to its destination. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
479
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 22:56:00 -
[557] - Quote
Omar Alharazaad wrote:Defending another player IS very boring if you're not certain they are likely to be attacked. Scouting out a route and checking to see how dangerous it is via the various tools available is much easier. Bringing NPC's into the equation isn't really part of CCP's style, nor is it in line with how the game generally runs. Players defend against players, and more often than not that defense doesn't occur in the form of guns or ewar, it happens in the form of awareness and information gathering. It's MUCH easier to survive a trap that you never step foot into it than to try to plunge headfirst into one that you know is there. Let someone else try to tank the lawnmower, while you skirt around it and get to your destination. A scout is more useful than ewar and logi when it comes to this... just knowing where the trap is gives you a major advantage when it comes to not being violenced by it.
This post brought to you by the Redundancy division of the department of redundancy, subsection in charge of things redundant. IE, bring a friend. Have him peek to see what is in next room. Don't die to things you don't have to encounter.
That is all, carry on. I'mma go to bed now, and my alcohol stream has too much blood in it. |

Anal Canal
The Conference Elite CODE.
65
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 23:48:00 -
[558] - Quote
Stay docked if you don't want to loose it. The-áterminal end of the digestive system.-á |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3495
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 00:11:00 -
[559] - Quote
This thread reminds me of just how important a service gankers provide to the community.
Without gankers, we'd never have had this 28 pages of utter hilarity. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 - Gank incursion runners, win prizes! August 26-Sept 30. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |

Capt Starfox
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
758
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 00:47:00 -
[560] - Quote
I shot a hauler once, it was great. I started another account and brought in an IRL friend all because of that one hauler. That little guy helped Eve live.
Obligatory: Carebears don't know what F10 is? Seems legit. Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PsychoticMonkCSM9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |

Karl Jerr
Herzack Unit
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 01:12:00 -
[561] - Quote
Dying in high sec in a spacecraft designed to haul stuff into low/null sec cloaked isn't a gamesystem fail but a user one. High sec isn't 100% safety, people in these forums say it often over time to understand this fact. We are all responsible of our own mistakes in this game, it's even the part of the fun this game provide. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 01:31:00 -
[562] - Quote
I am fully in agreement with the post by CCP Falcon. CONCORD is supposed to be a police force, they clean up the mess and dispatch criminals, not prevent the crime from occurring in the first place. People need to learn to fit their ships properly, check intel channels, and use the cloak + mwd trick. Personally i think non-combat ships should have fewer ehp, and combat ships should have more ehp, to reflect their relative designs.
What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force, is the way gankers, and specifically CODE, use bumping ships to prevent gank targets from warping, and therefore allow the EXACT SAME gankers to target the EXACT SAME ship every 15 minutes, without CONCORD dealing with the bumpers. What police force, upon foiling an attempted murder, and hauling the attempted murderers off to jail, would then, at the scene of the crime, allow friends of the criminals to hold down the victim for the next 15 minutes, so that the criminals, now released from jail, could come and finish the job? What police force, upon foiling an attempted car theft, and hauling the perpetrators to jail, would allow friends of the criminals, to, at the crime scene, prevent the car from leaving, so exactly 15 minutes later the EXACT SAME criminals could come and steal the EXACT SAME car? How is this even conceivably reflective of the way a police force would respond? Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act). |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
9362
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 01:32:00 -
[563] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
One of my pet concepts is that players should be allowed to use NPC for tasks whose opportunity cost is too high for a human player. Say, bringing NPC anti-gank right when you need it, for a price that compensates the loss inflicted on gankers. Would you spend a 500 millon one-shot NPC anti-gank to laugh at a flight of ganknados? Would you gank if you knew that X is known for using NPC anti-ganks? (These are rhetorical questions, btw)
Hi Indah,
Maybe you've quit this thread already.. lol. I don't blame you in the slightest.
I believe we should consider all the implications of your suggestion.
- If you can hire a 500m NPC, can't the gankers do the same? A gankfleet already has a CONCORD deterrent for anyone who may want to preemptively attack them. Now they have a protector. Is this wise?
- How effective should these guys be? How can they possibly *prevent* a fleet of high alpha/high DPS boats from killing you? There is no unit in the game that can currently do that (prevent.. not punish an entire gank squad)
- Are people going to start bringing these into lowsec/nullsec roams?
- Aren't you just describing a very powerful Drone? Aren't the Golems a bit on the border of being overpowered? Do you think we should have more powerful Drones than Golems?
- Wouldn't these NPCs be like Drones except you don't have to skill up in anything for them?
- Do you think a particularly rich Alliance or Corp could afford more of these NPCs than a lone freighter pilot? Do you know how much money CODE. is sitting on top of? How many of these NPCs could be afforded by 400b ISK?
~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9387
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 01:35:00 -
[564] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit
Not according to CCP.
Theirs is the only opinion that matters.
You can cry about real life all you like, but it has no bearing on how the magic space police behave in a video game. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24231
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 01:38:00 -
[565] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force, is the way gankers, and specifically CODE, use bumping ships to prevent gank targets from warping, and therefore allow the EXACT SAME gankers to target the EXACT SAME ship every 15 minutes, without CONCORD dealing with the bumpers. How is it an exploit? How is it inconsistent with CONCORD being a mechanic for enforcing aggression costs? What's so strange about the same gankers aggressing the same ship every 16 minutes?
Quote:Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act). They already can't do that, and it is already not equivalent to warp scrambling and hence not a criminal act. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
9362
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 01:41:00 -
[566] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force, is the way gankers, and specifically CODE, use bumping ships to prevent gank targets from warping, and therefore allow the EXACT SAME gankers to target the EXACT SAME ship every 15 minutes, without CONCORD dealing with the bumpers. What police force, upon foiling an attempted murder, and hauling the attempted murderers off to jail, would then, at the scene of the crime, allow friends of the criminals to hold down the victim for the next 15 minutes, so that the criminals, now released from jail, could come and finish the job? What police force, upon foiling an attempted car theft, and hauling the perpetrators to jail, would allow friends of the criminals, to, at the crime scene, prevent the car from leaving, so exactly 15 minutes later the EXACT SAME criminals could come and steal the EXACT SAME car? How is this even conceivably reflective of the way a police force would respond? Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act).
There are many no win situations in the game. Being caught in a bubble without the ability to burn out or tank the gate camp is a no win situation. Being caught without a WTZ at a station like Jita 4-4 is a no win situation.
The point is, no one forced that Orca to be in that no win situation. They could have scouted the system, they could have used a webber alt, they could have used a different ship, a different route (maybe through WH).. there are in fact a long list of remedies (which I believe I have previously linked, but here it is again).
Why should the mechanics change for someone who has deliberately placed themselves in a no win situation?
I want to mention Kobayashi Maru but I will refrain from that.  ~ Please support a yellow jumpsuit for me (and everyone else). Thank you! ~ |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:04:00 -
[567] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force, is the way gankers, and specifically CODE, use bumping ships to prevent gank targets from warping, and therefore allow the EXACT SAME gankers to target the EXACT SAME ship every 15 minutes, without CONCORD dealing with the bumpers. What police force, upon foiling an attempted murder, and hauling the attempted murderers off to jail, would then, at the scene of the crime, allow friends of the criminals to hold down the victim for the next 15 minutes, so that the criminals, now released from jail, could come and finish the job? What police force, upon foiling an attempted car theft, and hauling the perpetrators to jail, would allow friends of the criminals, to, at the crime scene, prevent the car from leaving, so exactly 15 minutes later the EXACT SAME criminals could come and steal the EXACT SAME car? How is this even conceivably reflective of the way a police force would respond? Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act).
There are many no win situations in the game. Being caught in a bubble without the ability to burn out or tank the gate camp is a no win situation. Being caught without a WTZ at a station like Jita 4-4 is a no win situation. The point is, no one forced that Orca to be in that no win situation. They could have scouted the system, they could have used a webber alt, they could have used a different ship, a different route (maybe through WH).. there are in fact a long list of remedies (which I believe I have previously linked, but here it is again). Why should the mechanics change for someone who has deliberately placed themselves in a no win situation? I want to mention Kobayashi Maru but I will refrain from that. 
Because as CCP Falcon said "CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive."
Bumping to prevent a ship between ganks, and make it functionally impossible to warp, is unlawful entrapment, and would draw a law enforcement agency response. CONCORD should mimic a law enforcement agency and respond to unlawful imprisonment.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24233
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:16:00 -
[568] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Because as CCP Falcon said "CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive." Yes, CONCORD does that. You didn't answer his question.
Quote:Bumping to prevent a ship between ganks, and make it functionally impossible to warp, is unlawful entrapment Even if it did do that (and it doesn't), it's not unlawful in any way.
Quote:CONCORD should mimic a law enforcement agency and respond to unlawful imprisonment. No, they really shouldn't, but they do anyway. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:22:00 -
[569] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Because as CCP Falcon said "CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive." Yes, CONCORD does that. You didn't answer his question. Quote:Bumping to prevent a ship between ganks, and make it functionally impossible to warp, is unlawful entrapment Even if it did do that (and it doesn't), it's not unlawful in any way. Quote:CONCORD should mimic a law enforcement agency and respond to unlawful imprisonment. No, they really shouldn't, but they do anyway.
Confining a person to a certain location without their consent is false imprisonment, and is a crime in virtually every country in the world. CONCORD, which per CCP Falcon acts as a law enforcement agency, should respond to this crime and punish the perpetrators. It isn't even a close question. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24233
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:24:00 -
[570] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Confining a person to a certain location without their consent is false imprisonment No. And even if it were, that's not something CONCORD cares about.
Quote:[it] is a crime in virtually every country in the world. New Eden isn't a country or in the world.
Quote:CONCORD, which per CCP Falcon acts as a police enforcement a reactive deterrent, should respond to this crime and punish the perpetrators. They already respond to crime and punish the perpetrators. What you're describing is not a crime. That's why they don't show up. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:25:00 -
[571] - Quote
Veers belvar must be a troll, or just ignorant as ****. Haulers have SO MANY options to ensure safe passage, it just requires you to use 2 chars, be it scout or more preferred a webber. you'll be in warp sideways before the first bump lands. but no youre refusing to use the tools handed and then cry for more hand holding. derp |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9391
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:26:00 -
[572] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Veers belvar must be a troll, or just ignorant as ****.
Why not both? Never underestimate the stupidity of carebears, nor their ability to blindly cling to something even after a blue explicitly tells them that they are wrong. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:28:00 -
[573] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Veers belvar must be a troll, or just ignorant as ****. Haulers have SO MANY options to ensure safe passage, it just requires you to use 2 chars, be it scout or more preferred a webber. you'll be in warp sideways before the first bump lands. but no youre refusing to use the tools handed and then cry for more hand holding. derp
Which is completely irrelevent to whether CONCORD should respond on not. If you fly into Uedama, without any support, or 2 characters, and the bad guys shoot you, does CONCORD say tough luck? Of course not, it comes and shoots the gankers! Why should CONCORD response depends on the "tools handed to you?" Do the police tell robbery victims, "we are not coming because you should have picked a better neighborhood to live in?" |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:30:00 -
[574] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Luukje wrote:Veers belvar must be a troll, or just ignorant as ****. Why not both? Never underestimate the stupidity of carebears, nor their ability to blindly cling to something even after a blue explicitly tells them that they are wrong.
Except that CCP Falcon has not responded to my point (and I hope that he will). You will excuse me for not relying on your expansive knowledge of game mechanics and law enforcement. And great use of "carebear," real classy. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24235
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:30:00 -
[575] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Which is completely irrelevent to whether CONCORD should respond on not. If you fly into Uedama, without any support, or 2 characters, and the bad guys shoot you, does CONCORD say tough luck? Of course not GǪbecause a crime has been committed, unlike with, say, bumping. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5419
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:32:00 -
[576] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act).
It's not a crime in New Eden.
It's not equivalent to warp scrambling. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:35:00 -
[577] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Which is completely irrelevent to whether CONCORD should respond on not. If you fly into Uedama, without any support, or 2 characters, and the bad guys shoot you, does CONCORD say tough luck? Of course not GǪbecause a crime has been committed, unlike with, say, bumping.
Well, this will be my last round with you, and I will await response from CCP Falcon. When the bumping is 100% functionally equivalent to warp scrambling it is a crime.
And from the other thread, my question to CCP Falcon - assuming optimal bumping from 3 optimally fitted Machariels, and optimal response from a freighter fitted with tank rigs, will the freighter be able to escape within 15 minutes? If the answer is, as I suspect, "no," then should not the bumping here, especially when used between successive gank attempts by the EXACT SAME gankers, trigger a CONCORD response per your prior post that CONCORD acts as a reactive law enforcement agency, which would respond to the commission of the crime of False Imprisonment?
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24236
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:37:00 -
[578] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Well, this will be my last round with you, and I will await response from CCP Falcon. You already have your answer.
Quote:When the bumping is 100% functionally equivalent to warp scrambling it is a crime. So never, then. That explains why it's allowed, why CCP says it's working as intended, and why CONCORD does not respond: because simply isn't a crime.
Quote:And from the other thread, my question to CCP Falcon - assuming optimal bumping from 3 optimally fitted Machariels, and optimal response from a freighter fitted with tank rigs, will the freighter be able to escape within 15 minutes? Yes. Your suspicions are based a completely different scenario where the freighter does pretty much nothing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5419
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:38:00 -
[579] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Which is completely irrelevent to whether CONCORD should respond on not. If you fly into Uedama, without any support, or 2 characters, and the bad guys shoot you, does CONCORD say tough luck? Of course not GǪbecause a crime has been committed, unlike with, say, bumping. Well, this will be my last round with you, and I will await response from CCP Falcon. When the bumping is 100% functionally equivalent to warp scrambling it is a crime. And from the other thread, my question to CCP Falcon - assuming optimal bumping from 3 optimally fitted Machariels, and optimal response from a freighter fitted with tank rigs, will the freighter be able to escape within 15 minutes? If the answer is, as I suspect, "no," then should not the bumping here, especially when used between successive gank attempts by the EXACT SAME gankers, trigger a CONCORD response per your prior post that CONCORD acts as a reactive law enforcement agency, which would respond to the commission of the crime of False Imprisonment?
You just crossposted your complaint to the thread which has the 100% official response to the complaint.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:39:00 -
[580] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Luukje wrote:Veers belvar must be a troll, or just ignorant as ****. Why not both? Never underestimate the stupidity of carebears, nor their ability to blindly cling to something even after a blue explicitly tells them that they are wrong.
the stupidity of the general eve public is what i make my isk on; as shown by OP  oh and veers, stop crying about bumps, the fact you got yourself bumped means you didnt have a scout or a webber or refused to use them. tools are there; use them. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9392
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:41:00 -
[581] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:When the bumping is 100% functionally equivalent to warp scrambling it is a crime.
Then it never is.
That was easier than I thought it would be. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:44:00 -
[582] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Luukje wrote:Veers belvar must be a troll, or just ignorant as ****. Why not both? Never underestimate the stupidity of carebears, nor their ability to blindly cling to something even after a blue explicitly tells them that they are wrong. the stupidity of the general eve public is what i make my isk on; as shown by OP  oh and veers, stop crying about bumps, the fact you got yourself bumped means you didnt have a scout or a webber or refused to use them. tools are there; use them.
I didn't get bumped (feel free to check my killboard), and response to criminal activity in highsec should not depend on using a scout or a webber. Those may be helpful for avoiding death between the crime and the CONCORD response, but should not be required to trigger CONCORD acting as a "law enforcement agency."
|

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:45:00 -
[583] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Which is completely irrelevent to whether CONCORD should respond on not. If you fly into Uedama, without any support, or 2 characters, and the bad guys shoot you, does CONCORD say tough luck? Of course not GǪbecause a crime has been committed, unlike with, say, bumping. Well, this will be my last round with you, and I will await response from CCP Falcon. When the bumping is 100% functionally equivalent to warp scrambling it is a crime. And from the other thread, my question to CCP Falcon - assuming optimal bumping from 3 optimally fitted Machariels, and optimal response from a freighter fitted with tank rigs, will the freighter be able to escape within 15 minutes? If the answer is, as I suspect, "no," then should not the bumping here, especially when used between successive gank attempts by the EXACT SAME gankers, trigger a CONCORD response per your prior post that CONCORD acts as a reactive law enforcement agency, which would respond to the commission of the crime of False Imprisonment? You just crossposted your complaint to the thread which has the 100% official response to the complaint.
That thread never addressed using bumping falsely imprison gank victims between successive ganks from the exact same gankers. That response was to AFK miners crying that Code bumped them off their asteroid, and required the to come press F1 more often than once an hour. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1101
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:45:00 -
[584] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force ...is the way they appear out of thin air and have infinite ships available.
Obviously this is totally illogical, there should be a finite number of CONCORD ships, which can be killed, and which have to travel the scene of crimes.
As long as we're appealing to real life. [witty image] - Stream |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9393
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:48:00 -
[585] - Quote
I didn't know it was possible for anyone to be worse than Dinsdale, but here he is. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:48:00 -
[586] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force ...is the way they appear out of thin air and have infinite ships available. Obviously this is totally illogical, there should be a finite number of CONCORD ships, which can be killed, and which have to travel the scene of crimes. As long as we're appealing to real life.
Yes, because in real life the criminals routinely blow away the police forces....*eyeroll*
What would be nice is if anyone with -10 security status would be sent to "Eve jail" and be unable to undock for 30 days after the commission of each criminal act in highsec. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24237
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:48:00 -
[587] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:response to criminal activity in highsec should not depend on using a scout or a webber. Good news: it doesn't.
Quote:Those may be helpful for avoiding death between the crime and the CONCORD response, but should not be required to trigger CONCORD acting as a "law enforcement agency." CONCORD is not supposed to act as a law enforcement agency.
Quote:That thread never addressed using bumping falsely imprison gank victims between successive ganks from the exact same gankers. That response was to AFK miners crying that Code bumped them off their asteroid, and required the to come press F1 more often than once an hour. Yes it did. The response is pretty much exactly the same, and a response in relation bumping was posted. You just refused to read, comprehend, and/or accept what was said to you.
Quote:Yes, because in real life the criminals routinely blow away the police forces....*eyeroll* Unfortunately, yes. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9393
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:51:00 -
[588] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: What would be nice is if anyone with -10 security status would be sent to "Eve jail" and be unable to undock for 30 days after the commission of each criminal act in highsec.
And here we arrive at the end goal of every carebear. The functional elimination of PvP in highsec.
Trammel. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1101
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:53:00 -
[589] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Yes, because in real life the criminals routinely blow away the police forces....*eyeroll* It's nice to know that wherever you are, law enforcement officers dying in the line of duty is unheard of. That's not true everywhere. [witty image] - Stream |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:56:00 -
[590] - Quote
Crumplecorn wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Yes, because in real life the criminals routinely blow away the police forces....*eyeroll* It's nice to know that wherever you are, law enforcement officers dying in the line of duty is unheard of. That's not true everywhere.
It's not nice to know that where you live law enforcement officers quickly responding to harm to their colleagues, and achieving a monopoly of force is unheard of. That is true pretty much everywhere.
|

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5419
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:59:00 -
[591] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:That thread never addressed using bumping falsely imprison gank victims between successive ganks from the exact same gankers. That response was to AFK miners crying that Code bumped them off their asteroid, and required the to come press F1 more often than once an hour.
GM Karidor wrote:CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis.
Where, exactly do you find that qualification in their ruling? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24239
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 02:59:00 -
[592] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:It's not nice to know that where you live law enforcement officers quickly responding to harm to their colleagues, and achieving a monopoly of force is unheard of. That is true pretty much everywhere. No, that's actually still only the situation in a small set of privileged areas.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:02:00 -
[593] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:That thread never addressed using bumping falsely imprison gank victims between successive ganks from the exact same gankers. That response was to AFK miners crying that Code bumped them off their asteroid, and required the to come press F1 more often than once an hour. GM Karidor wrote:CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis. Where, exactly do you find that qualification in their ruling?
Because it did not address this specific, and unusual, circumstance, which is currently being used by CODE and its allies. And is, as I have pointed out, inconsistent with CONCORD's function "as a law enforcement agency," and with the design of highsec.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24239
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:05:00 -
[594] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Because it did not address this specific, and unusual, circumstance, which is currently being used by CODE and its allies. That doesn't answer his question: where, exactly do you find your qualification in their ruling?
And yes, it does address that circumstance. It was posted in response to that circumstance.
Quote:And is, as I have pointed out, inconsistent with CONCORD's function "as a law enforcement agency," and with the design of highsec. How is it inconsistent with CONCORD's function as a cost-enforcemement mechanism (because that's what it is GÇö the law enforcement part is just some nonsense you've pulled out of your lower back)? How is it inconsistent with the design of highsec? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9393
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:05:00 -
[595] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: Because it did not address this specific, and unusual, circumstance, which is currently being used by CODE and its allies.
It was specifically formulated with that in mind, after people cried for a month straight about exactly that.
The answer was, and continues to be, that bumping is not an exploit unless they actually try to get away. Spamming "warp to" a few more times does not constitute actually trying, by the way. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
523
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:26:00 -
[596] - Quote
Lord, why hasn't somebody shut down this thread by now? I've seen much more interesting and benign threads closed for less reason than the silly repetitiousness of this one, and there's already another thread about freighter ganking that's longer than War and Peace. If you don't like the mechanics of high sec as they exist then go and find another game; arguing like internet lawyers is not going to change the mechanics of the game, and CCP has made that so clear so many times that this takes pointlessness to a new low.
High sec ganking is a fact of life. Ship bumping is a fact of life. That is the way Eve works. It could not be more simple than that. You cannot argue those practices out of existence. The devs have said they will happily watch the game go down in flames before they will make any player entirely safe in high sec. What more do you need to know? |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5419
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:29:00 -
[597] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:That thread never addressed using bumping falsely imprison gank victims between successive ganks from the exact same gankers. That response was to AFK miners crying that Code bumped them off their asteroid, and required the to come press F1 more often than once an hour. GM Karidor wrote:CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis. Where, exactly do you find that qualification in their ruling? Because it did not address this specific, and unusual, circumstance, which is currently being used by CODE and its allies. And is, as I have pointed out, inconsistent with CONCORD's function "as a law enforcement agency," and with the design of highsec.
Even if CONCORD was designed to be a law enforcement agency, there is nothing illegal in New Eden about bumping. If you'd like to call for bumping to be illegal, enjoy when everyone points out to you the inevitable hilarious results. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:42:00 -
[598] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:That thread never addressed using bumping falsely imprison gank victims between successive ganks from the exact same gankers. That response was to AFK miners crying that Code bumped them off their asteroid, and required the to come press F1 more often than once an hour. GM Karidor wrote:CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another playerGÇÖs ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis. Where, exactly do you find that qualification in their ruling? Because it did not address this specific, and unusual, circumstance, which is currently being used by CODE and its allies. And is, as I have pointed out, inconsistent with CONCORD's function "as a law enforcement agency," and with the design of highsec. Even if CONCORD was designed to be a law enforcement agency, there is nothing illegal in New Eden about bumping. If you'd like to call for bumping to be illegal, enjoy when everyone points out to you the inevitable hilarious results.
Not sure if you have been following, but I suggested that gank victims get 60 seconds of immunity from bumping so they can fly off.
|

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 03:46:00 -
[599] - Quote
Ban Bindy wrote:Lord, why hasn't somebody shut down this thread by now? I've seen much more interesting and benign threads closed for less reason than the silly repetitiousness of this one, and there's already another thread about freighter ganking that's longer than War and Peace. If you don't like the mechanics of high sec as they exist then go and find another game; arguing like internet lawyers is not going to change the mechanics of the game, and CCP has made that so clear so many times that this takes pointlessness to a new low.
High sec ganking is a fact of life. Ship bumping is a fact of life. That is the way Eve works. It could not be more simple than that. You cannot argue those practices out of existence. The devs have said they will happily watch the game go down in flames before they will make any player entirely safe in high sec. What more do you need to know?
Not clear to me how nerfing ship bumping between ganks makes you "entirely safe." It just means that the gankers only get one shot at you before CONCORD comes. They don't get 2 or 3 or 12 shots, which seems much more reasonable. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 04:09:00 -
[600] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Not sure if you have been following, but I suggested that gank victims get 60 seconds of immunity from bumping so they can fly off.
In other words, I can render my Freighter perfectly safe by shooting it with a noobship.
Why should someone shooting you make you suddenly incorporeal?
Again, Bumping is not a crime in New Eden. Remember, this is a legal system where vigilante retribution is legal, mass murder of non-capsuleers is either ignored or encouraged, etc. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 04:26:00 -
[601] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Not sure if you have been following, but I suggested that gank victims get 60 seconds of immunity from bumping so they can fly off. In other words, I can render my Freighter perfectly safe by shooting it with a noobship. Why should someone shooting you make you suddenly incorporeal? Again, Bumping is not a crime in New Eden. Remember, this is a legal system where vigilante retribution is legal, mass murder of non-capsuleers is either ignored or encouraged, etc.
Not sure what "safe" means - the invulnerability would start once CONCORD arrives, at which point your ship is supposed to be "safe." (note that you could still be shot).
And the fact that bumping is not in general a crime does not mean that when bumping is used to achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling (which is, and everyone agrees should be a crime), that it should not be treated as a crime. |

Matrea D
Maggie's Magical Miners Maggie's Magical Malliance
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 04:31:00 -
[602] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: Because as CCP Falcon said "CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive."
Bumping to prevent a ship between ganks, and make it functionally impossible to warp, is unlawful entrapment, and would draw a law enforcement agency response. CONCORD should mimic a law enforcement agency and respond to unlawful imprisonment.
Veers Belvar wrote: And the fact that bumping is not in general a crime does not mean that when bumping is used to achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling (which is, and everyone agrees should be a crime), that it should not be treated as a crime.
It does not make it functionally impossible to warp. You can escape from bumping if you do it right, or you can avoid being bumped in the first place by using a scout/web alt/friend.
Speaking of web alts, it's almost silly how safe you can actually make yourself in high sec if you take the necessary steps. It feels unfair that I can warp my freighter off in less time than it will probably take to lock it, and even if someone does lock it and manage to shoot/scramble it, my web alt will just jam them anyway and the freighter warps out before any bumper can even reach it.
Game mechanics are hard when you don't understand them. I've gotten out of every bumping my freighter has ever been subjected to. Bad bumpers? Maybe, but even in your example of optimally fit/skilled Machariel pilots bumping with such precision and consistency that they do, in fact, make it impossible to warp out to any fleet member or celestial, then I my response would be to say bravo to their handiwork, not punish them for it.
If you can't get a single friend or alt to come help you out after a failed gank, if you can't find a single person from the anti-ganking channel to come and bring some ECM to save your ship from the next round of ganking, how is that CCP's problem to fix? |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
920
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 04:43:00 -
[603] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I am fully in agreement with the post by CCP Falcon. CONCORD is supposed to be a police force, they clean up the mess and dispatch criminals, not prevent the crime from occurring in the first place. People need to learn to fit their ships properly, check intel channels, and use the cloak + mwd trick. Personally i think non-combat ships should have fewer ehp, and combat ships should have more ehp, to reflect their relative designs.
What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force, is the way gankers, and specifically CODE, use bumping ships to prevent gank targets from warping, and therefore allow the EXACT SAME gankers to target the EXACT SAME ship every 15 minutes, without CONCORD dealing with the bumpers. What police force, upon foiling an attempted murder, and hauling the attempted murderers off to jail, would then, at the scene of the crime, allow friends of the criminals to hold down the victim for the next 15 minutes, so that the criminals, now released from jail, could come and finish the job? What police force, upon foiling an attempted car theft, and hauling the perpetrators to jail, would allow friends of the criminals, to, at the crime scene, prevent the car from leaving, so exactly 15 minutes later the EXACT SAME criminals could come and steal the EXACT SAME car? How is this even conceivably reflective of the way a police force would respond? Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act).
Lucky for us, this is not real life police, car theft, or murder. It's a video game. To attempt to equate the way the universe of EVE works with the way our world works is silly. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:18:00 -
[604] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I am fully in agreement with the post by CCP Falcon. CONCORD is supposed to be a police force, they clean up the mess and dispatch criminals, not prevent the crime from occurring in the first place. People need to learn to fit their ships properly, check intel channels, and use the cloak + mwd trick. Personally i think non-combat ships should have fewer ehp, and combat ships should have more ehp, to reflect their relative designs.
What does not make sense, and is clearly an exploit, and is wholly inconsistent with CONCORD being a police force, is the way gankers, and specifically CODE, use bumping ships to prevent gank targets from warping, and therefore allow the EXACT SAME gankers to target the EXACT SAME ship every 15 minutes, without CONCORD dealing with the bumpers. What police force, upon foiling an attempted murder, and hauling the attempted murderers off to jail, would then, at the scene of the crime, allow friends of the criminals to hold down the victim for the next 15 minutes, so that the criminals, now released from jail, could come and finish the job? What police force, upon foiling an attempted car theft, and hauling the perpetrators to jail, would allow friends of the criminals, to, at the crime scene, prevent the car from leaving, so exactly 15 minutes later the EXACT SAME criminals could come and steal the EXACT SAME car? How is this even conceivably reflective of the way a police force would respond? Please take action so that bumpers cant not unlawfully entrap (a crime in every jurisdiction!) gank targets between gank attempts (an action that is 100% equivalent to warp scrambling, and hence a criminal act). Lucky for us, this is not real life police, car theft, or murder. It's a video game. To attempt to equate the way the universe of EVE works with the way our world works is silly.
I could respond, but I will let CCP Falcon respond for me:
CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:21:00 -
[605] - Quote
Matrea D wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: Because as CCP Falcon said "CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive."
Bumping to prevent a ship between ganks, and make it functionally impossible to warp, is unlawful entrapment, and would draw a law enforcement agency response. CONCORD should mimic a law enforcement agency and respond to unlawful imprisonment.
Veers Belvar wrote: And the fact that bumping is not in general a crime does not mean that when bumping is used to achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling (which is, and everyone agrees should be a crime), that it should not be treated as a crime.
It does not make it functionally impossible to warp. You can escape from bumping if you do it right, or you can avoid being bumped in the first place by using a scout/web alt/friend. Speaking of web alts, it's almost silly how safe you can actually make yourself in high sec if you take the necessary steps. It feels unfair that I can warp my freighter off in less time than it will probably take to lock it, and even if someone does lock it and manage to shoot/scramble it, my web alt will just jam them anyway and the freighter warps out before any bumper can even reach it. Game mechanics are hard when you don't understand them. I've gotten out of every bumping my freighter has ever been subjected to. Bad bumpers? Maybe, but even in your example of optimally fit/skilled Machariel pilots bumping with such precision and consistency that they do, in fact, make it impossible to warp out to any fleet member or celestial, then I my response would be to say bravo to their handiwork, not punish them for it. If you can't get a single friend or alt to come help you out after a failed gank, if you can't find a single person from the anti-ganking channel to come and bring some ECM to save your ship from the next round of ganking, how is that CCP's problem to fix?
The point (once again) is that CONCORD response does not depend on what you could/should have done better. It merely depends on whether a crime was committed. Here, bumping between ganks, which is unpreventable if done optimally, is 100% identical to warp scrambling, which everyone here agrees is and should be a criminal act, resulting in CONCORD coming and destroying the perpetrators.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9401
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:24:00 -
[606] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:It merely depends on whether a crime was committed.
And CCP has stated, again and again, that bumping is not a crime. Evidence of this can be observed in that bumping does not draw CONCORD.
Quote: Here, bumping between ganks, which is unpreventable if done optimally
False.
As you have been repeatedly told, in fact. Cease your lies.
Quote: is 100% identical to warp scrambling
Once again, that is a lie. Warp scrambling is the activation of a offensive module. Bumping is not.
Quote: which everyone here agrees is and should be a criminal act, resulting in CONCORD coming and destroying the perpetrators.
No one agrees with that. In fact everyone disagrees with that. You are unable to stand up for your opinion on your own and on it's own merit, so you have to conjure up this imaginary consensus.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
921
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:24:00 -
[607] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
I could respond, but I will let CCP Falcon respond for me:
CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive.
He's using a analogy in order to express himself in a way that is easier to understand, Veers.
It's your decision to crank that analogy to eleven and assume that he means CONCORD IS THE SAME AS YOUR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 100% OF THE WAY and that ALL LAWS (Such as false imprisonment, my god dude, where were you going with that?) that your local police enforce must also be enforced by Concord.
You're smarter then that, Veers. Also, you ignored the simple fact that bumping is a valid and supported game mechanic, and that your comments probably belong in features and ideas discussion - as you are proposing changes to game mechanics at this time.
|

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
921
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:26:00 -
[608] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
The point (once again) is that CONCORD response does not depend on what you could/should have done better. It merely depends on whether a crime was committed. Here, bumping between ganks, which is unpreventable if done optimally, is 100% identical to warp scrambling, which everyone here agrees is and should be a criminal act, resulting in CONCORD coming and destroying the perpetrators.
No one agrees with that, at least, no one I know. Bumping is not 100% identical to being pointed, and if you are unable to understand that simple difference.... I don't know how to help you.
*edit* on a second read - did you mean that we all agree pointing someone should be a criminal act? I may have misunderstood you. If so, sorry about that - but my point remains - bumping is not 100% identical to being pointed. Not even close. Not even in the same ballpark. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:29:00 -
[609] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
I could respond, but I will let CCP Falcon respond for me:
CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive.
He's using a analogy in order to express himself in a way that is easier to understand, Veers. It's your decision to crank that analogy to eleven and assume that he means CONCORD IS THE SAME AS YOUR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 100% OF THE WAY and that ALL LAWS (Such as false imprisonment, my god dude, where were you going with that?) that your local police enforce must also be enforced by Concord. You're smarter then that, Veers. Also, you ignored the simple fact that bumping is a valid and supported game mechanic, and that your comments probably belong in features and ideas discussion - as you are proposing changes to game mechanics at this time.
Oh really? So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:31:00 -
[610] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
The point (once again) is that CONCORD response does not depend on what you could/should have done better. It merely depends on whether a crime was committed. Here, bumping between ganks, which is unpreventable if done optimally, is 100% identical to warp scrambling, which everyone here agrees is and should be a criminal act, resulting in CONCORD coming and destroying the perpetrators.
No one agrees with that, at least, no one I know. Bumping is not 100% identical to being pointed, and if you are unable to understand that simple difference.... I don't know how to help you. *edit* on a second read - did you mean that we all agree pointing someone should be a criminal act? I may have misunderstood you. If so, sorry about that - but my point remains - bumping is not 100% identical to being pointed. Not even close. Not even in the same ballpark.
Yes, my point was that there is a consensus on pointing. And that if it is true that optimal bumping creates the exact same functional result as pointing, that it should be treated similarly in that specific circumstance.
|

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
923
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:38:00 -
[611] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Oh really? So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec.
Yes, it makes perfect sense - that's how EVE works. That is the game mechanics.
If you have a better way of doing it - make a really good write up with a fix that would not introduce tons of un-intended side effects (and good luck with that, in a game like EVE that is harder then you may think... Even CCP has issues with it, remember ESS units being deployed in W-space for extra lulz?), head over to "Features and Ideas discussion" and post it up.
You're also leaving out part of the story. During that 15 mins we kept that Orca bumped, he could have gotten away. All he needed was some corp mates or friends to get his back and come help him out - in fact, one single friend or corp mate acting as scout would have prevented him from jumping into the system in the first place.
But, he did none of this. He just went on auto with billions and billions of ISK in shiny things and flew right into a damn war zone. Literally, one friend scouting a jump ahead of him would have saved him. Of course, he would need to be at the keyboard in the first place.
You're also refusing to admit that there is a valid counter to bumping. I'm not going to spell it out to you, but I will say that it does involve being at keyboard and having friends/corp mates.
*Edit: Also, that Orca had some pretty sick loot too :) * |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9401
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:39:00 -
[612] - Quote
See, if they just did what I wanted, and eliminated CONCORD's infallibility, we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.
If there wasn't the expectation of safety, then the expectation wouldn't be there to be shattered and cause hurt feelings. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Unleashed Pestilence
985
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:46:00 -
[613] - Quote
This was too great to pass up.
Angeal MacNova wrote:Constantly losing a ship to perform the gank will increase the demand of the type of ship commonly used. Price inflates = bad. The target ships are often haulers and miners. Again, they are losing a ship and so the demand for these ships go up. Price inflates = bad. Please demonstrate how a price increase in necessarily bad. Without demand for ships there would be no need to produce ships. Margins on barges, t1 industrials, t1 freighters, catalysts an taloses would be nearly zero. Thrashers and Tornados would also take a hit, though they have more usages that do not involve high sec aggression.
Angeal MacNova wrote:Now that is just the short term.
Long term, when the price goes up and the gap between production cost and market price widens, more people make them. Supply goes up, price come back down, and the moving quantity increases even further. This is good but....
There is a problem.
The target ships are the indy players. So their ship loss becomes an expense that is taken into consideration. So even if the profit margin widens, this increase in revenue doesn't equate to an increase in profit. Profit = Revenue - Expenses. So despite the increase in price, the market doesn't see the influx of new producers and the price inflates. Even in the long term which is bad. Except that the good indie players find methods to minimize these losses, and excel in the market where the bad ones lose. They can use any of the techniques mentioned in this thread to get ahead. I really shouldn't have to list all of those here.
Angeal MacNova wrote: It goes even deeper than that.
The indy guys being ganked are being done so by destroyers mostly. So they have an incentive not to produce them if they are only going to be used against them. They'll produce other things instead. So now the price of whatever flavor of the month ganking ship will inflate even in the long term. This is bad, especially for the gankers. Talk about shooting your own feet lol.
The good indy players realize that their competition is losing more to ganks than they are. At this point they realize that supplying gankers can actually turn them a profit and put pressure on competitors. Win/Win.
Angeal MacNova wrote: Not only that but the added expense is factored in when goods are produced. So two things happen;
1. If the indy players are just in it for the isk and the loss of their ships becomes too much of an expense, they'll do something else like run missions. Less producers means inflated prices. This is compounded if the other thing these players do causes them to lose ships as this will now increase the demand also.
2. Those that do stick it out will factor the expense into their selling price and the price of all goods will increase. Again, inflation.
Price of goods increasing is not the same thing as inflation. Price increases are not necessarily good or bad, and in this case they reward good players while punishing bad ones.
Angeal MacNova wrote: So while the act of ganking in itself is not bad and can be good for the economy, the gankers' favorite choice of target is bad for the games economy in both the short and long term.
Now I know that I haven't brushed up on economics recently, but please try to do a better job in the future, and for gods sake LEARN WHAT INFLATION MEANS.
New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 05:52:00 -
[614] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Oh really? So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec.
Yes, it makes perfect sense - that's how EVE works. That is the game mechanics. If you have a better way of doing it - make a really good write up with a fix that would not introduce tons of un-intended side effects (and good luck with that, in a game like EVE that is harder then you may think... Even CCP has issues with it, remember ESS units being deployed in W-space for extra lulz?), head over to "Features and Ideas discussion" and post it up. You're also leaving out part of the story. During that 15 mins we kept that Orca bumped, he could have gotten away. All he needed was some corp mates or friends to get his back and come help him out - in fact, one single friend or corp mate acting as scout would have prevented him from jumping into the system in the first place. But, he did none of this. He just went on auto with billions and billions of ISK in shiny things and flew right into a damn war zone. Literally, one friend scouting a jump ahead of him would have saved him. Of course, he would need to be at the keyboard in the first place. You're also refusing to admit that there is a valid counter to bumping. I'm not going to spell it out to you, but I will say that it does involve being at keyboard and having friends/corp mates. *Edit: Also, that Orca had some pretty sick loot too :) *
And again....saying "this is the game mechanics" is irrelevant to the purpose of this thread, which was to highlight CCP's lack of protection for haulers, and suggest improvements. I am aware that, as of now, pressing F5 or what not, and using your warp scrambler mod on a ship gets CONCORD to come and blow you up. Using your 3 buddies in Machariels to bump the guy so he cannot possibly escape on his own, and achieving the exact same functional result as a successful warp scramble, does not get CONCORD to come and blow you up. What I am pointing out is that on a 20,000 foot view, that does not make sense.
Your response basically consists of "get friends to come." Of course, if someone gets pointed by a mod, they don't need friends to come because CONCORD comes. Why, when the pointing is accomplished by bumping, rather than by activiating a mod, should they need to get friends to come? The two activities achieve an identical result. And saying "it's because pointing is an offensive activation of a mod" is not an accomplished answer. All that does is restate what the current mechanics do, it does not demonstrate why the mechanics work like that. The game should focus on outcomes, not the process for achieving those outcomes (pressing F5 or using bumping Machariels).
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9402
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:03:00 -
[615] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: And again....saying "this is the game mechanics" is irrelevant to the purpose of this thread, which was to highlight CCP's lack of protection for haulers, and suggest improvements.
The purpose of this thread is not relevant when a developer tells you repeatedly "too bad, working as intended."
You don't get to "suggest improvements", they aren't wanted. You don't get to make criticisms, they are wrong by default. You don't get safety without putting in effort for it, and that is working as fully intended.
You lose. You get nothing.
Deal with it. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Matrea D
Maggie's Magical Miners Maggie's Magical Malliance
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:12:00 -
[616] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:The game should focus on outcomes, not the process for achieving those outcomes (pressing F5 or using bumping Machariels).
No, it shouldn't. You're basically saying that the game should have fewer dimensions, less details. Plus, you keep citing an example of absolute perfection as your "equivalent to warp scrambling" argument.
The real point is that there are a list of things that are and aren't crimes in high sec. One of those crimes is activating an offensive module on another player. And although some of those modules on the list of offensive modules are designed to prevent warping, the prevention of warping itself is not a crime.
You are arguing that because one of the modules on the list is designed to stop warping, any attempt at preventing a warp should be a crime as well.
Which, of course, reinforces the idea the carebears prefer to have game mechanics changed rather than adapt to them. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:22:00 -
[617] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Not sure what "safe" means - the invulnerability would start once CONCORD arrives, at which point your ship is supposed to be "safe." (note that you could still be shot).
And the fact that bumping is not in general a crime does not mean that when bumping is used to achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling (which is, and everyone agrees should be a crime), that it should not be treated as a crime.
Wrong. Once CONCORD arrives, the attackers ships are supposed to be *mostly* disabled. That does not, in any way, imply that you are safe. For example, a properly fit smartbombing battleship can keep smartbombing until the CONCORD battleship takes the infinite damage shot some 10s after arriving on grid.
Bumping does not, in fact, achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling.
Veers Belvar wrote:I could respond, but I will let CCP Falcon respond for me:
CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive.
Notice the difference between what Falcon said and what you are saying. He says that their role (providing a reactive deterrent) is *like* the role of a police force. You are saying that CONCORD *is* a police force.
"is Like" and "Are" mean very, very different things.
Veers Belvar wrote:Oh really? So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec.
CONCORD has absolutely zero investigative roles. They simply react to any illegal aggression. (Also, Gankers usually pull CONCORD off the scene immediately after the gank attempt, so they're not actually sitting there while the target gets bumped, and they'll definitely be pulled off the scene before the next gank attempt.)
And finally, the target absolutely can escape. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:27:00 -
[618] - Quote
Matrea D wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:The game should focus on outcomes, not the process for achieving those outcomes (pressing F5 or using bumping Machariels).
No, it shouldn't. You're basically saying that the game should have fewer dimensions, less details. Plus, you keep citing an example of absolute perfection as your "equivalent to warp scrambling" argument. The real point is that there are a list of things that are and aren't crimes in high sec. One of those crimes is activating an offensive module on another player. And although some of those modules on the list of offensive modules are designed to prevent warping, the prevention of warping itself is not a crime. You are arguing that because one of the modules on the list is designed to stop warping, any attempt at preventing a warp should be a crime as well. Which, of course, reinforces the idea the carebears prefer to have game mechanics changed rather than adapt to them.
No not at all, simply pointing out that defining "crime" as the pressing of F5 doesn't make any sense. It would be like making it a crime to break into a car with a hammer, but not a crime to steal the key and break in. And once again it leads to the truly absurd result I mentioned where "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec."
I am confident that the Devs will ignore all the Nullsec posters here who are just motivated by "tears" and "carebears" and "explosions," and instead give a reasoned response to my (at least in my view) well stated inquiry. |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3501
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:27:00 -
[619] - Quote
If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 - Gank incursion runners, win prizes! August 26-Sept 30. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:28:00 -
[620] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:It would be like making it a crime to break into a car with a hammer, but not a crime to steal the key and break in.
In EVE HS, it is a criminal act to shoot someone's ship. It is not a criminal act to steal anything.
So... "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:29:00 -
[621] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock.
Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9402
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:30:00 -
[622] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: I am confident that the Devs will ignore all the Nullsec posters here who are just motivated by "tears" and "carebears" and "explosions," and instead give a reasoned response to my (at least in my view) well stated inquiry.
CCP Falcon already gave the opinion on the matter. Here, I'll even quote it.
CCP Falcon wrote:There are a multitude of ways to protect yourself from suicide gankers, people just automatically assume they're "safe" in highsec, then get annoyed when they lose a ship because of their own lack of spatial awareness.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3501
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:38:00 -
[623] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock. Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene.
This would obviously make the game worse. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=366607 - Gank incursion runners, win prizes! August 26-Sept 30. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:48:00 -
[624] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: I am confident that the Devs will ignore all the Nullsec posters here who are just motivated by "tears" and "carebears" and "explosions," and instead give a reasoned response to my (at least in my view) well stated inquiry.
CCP Falcon already gave the opinion on the matter. Here, I'll even quote it. CCP Falcon wrote:There are a multitude of ways to protect yourself from suicide gankers, people just automatically assume they're "safe" in highsec, then get annoyed when they lose a ship because of their own lack of spatial awareness.
I decided not to pick nits earlier, but it bothers me now that I see it again. It's *situational* awareness that's lacking.
Spatial awareness is the ability to determine relative positioning, which I assume nearly every EVE player has, since it's usually acquired over the course of early childhood and only lost in the event of brain injury. (Round block, round hole)
Situational awareness is the ability to recognize events and actions and determine their effects on goals and objectives. (Huh, I'm getting ganked, this'll mean I won't successfully haul the station egg) "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:52:00 -
[625] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: I am confident that the Devs will ignore all the Nullsec posters here who are just motivated by "tears" and "carebears" and "explosions," and instead give a reasoned response to my (at least in my view) well stated inquiry.
CCP Falcon already gave the opinion on the matter. Here, I'll even quote it. CCP Falcon wrote:There are a multitude of ways to protect yourself from suicide gankers, people just automatically assume they're "safe" in highsec, then get annoyed when they lose a ship because of their own lack of spatial awareness.
I decided not to pick nits earlier, but it bothers me now that I see it again. It's *situational* awareness that's lacking. Spatial awareness is the ability to determine relative positioning, which I assume nearly every EVE player has, since it's usually acquired over the course of early childhood and only lost in the event of brain injury. (Round block, round hole) Situational awareness is the ability to recognize events and actions and determine their effects on goals and objectives. (Huh, I'm getting ganked, this'll mean I won't successfully haul the station egg)
Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec."
I do this as someone who has never lost a hauler to a highsec suicide gank (in fact my only suicide gank loss to date has been a 4 million or so isk probe). I would just like the game to work as intended, and to provide the appropriate level of protection in highsec. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9402
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 06:56:00 -
[626] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: I decided not to pick nits earlier, but it bothers me now that I see it again. It's *situational* awareness that's lacking.
Eh, English is my second language as well, and while you are correct, I believe the basic point still stands.
That being, if you die in highsec, it's most likely because you failed to take adequate steps towards your own defense.
That said, spatial awareness could be referencing understanding of your surroundings, and the resulting knowledge of correct behavior that flows as a result? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24245
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:01:00 -
[627] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. In other words, you are complaining about something you have no knowledge of whatsoever. You are suggesting changes to game mechanics you don't understand. You are complaining about situations that don't actually exist. You are making claims based on hearsay, and keep repeating them in spite of them being 100% false. You are making judgement on events that have never happened.
Quote:I would just like the game to work as intended. It is. You have not offered even the slightest hint of evidence that it doesn't. You have even gone so far as to suggest that the devs are wrong; that their saying it is working as intended is incorrect; that their judgement on what is ok and what isn't must change.
You don't have a leg to stand on, and you know it. Everyone knows it. It's been known for years before you even started making your uninformed and nonsensical rants about things you have no clue of.
RubyPorto wrote:I decided not to pick nits earlier, but it bothers me now that I see it again. It's *situational* awareness that's lacking. To be fair, spatial awareness is exactly what you need to get out of a bump situation.  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9402
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:03:00 -
[628] - Quote
Tippia wrote: You don't have a leg to stand on, and you know it.
Legs? Not just that.
Legs, arms, tongue even, all gone. He's propping himself up with his **** alone at this point. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:06:00 -
[629] - Quote
And again our two favorite nullsec supporters appear on the scene to troll and derail any thread that might suggest some kind of reasonable and fair level of protection for players in highsec. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24246
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:08:00 -
[630] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:And again GǪyou are unable to offer any hint of evidence that the game isn't working as intended.
You are unable to do so because you are fundamentally ignorant and uninformed about all aspects involved. All you have are lies, fantasies, inventions, and fallacies.
I'm going to be very very very generous right now. I'm going to give you three chances to demonstrate GÇö using actual facts GÇö that something isn't working as intended as far as bumping and ganking goes. Go, attempt #1! GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9402
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:08:00 -
[631] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:And again our two favorite nullsec supporters appear on the scene to troll and derail any thread that might suggest some kind of reasonable and fair level of protection for players in highsec.
I live in highsec, fluffy.
Now shut it, the grown ups are talking. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:22:00 -
[632] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec."
Copying the same post over and over doesn't make it true. I addressed all of those points.
Laws in different jurisdictions are different. New Eden has different laws than the real world, and New Eden's capsuleer police (CONCORD) have an extremely limited, reactionary role which fits the laws of New Eden.
If you perform an act of illegal aggression in HS, CONCORD destroys your ship, docks you sec status, and gives you a 15min time out. That is their entire function. Their function has nothing to do with protecting anyone, simply with creating cost for illegal aggression in HS.
This is how the game was always intended to work. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:25:00 -
[633] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eh, English is my second language as well, and while you are correct, I believe the basic point still stands.
That being, if you die in highsec, it's most likely because you failed to take adequate steps towards your own defense.
That said, spatial awareness could be referencing understanding of your surroundings, and the resulting knowledge of correct behavior that flows as a result?
Like I said, I'm picking nits (English idiom for fussy fault finding. Comes from the days of having people pick lice off of you instead of bathing).
That definition you proposed is basically the definition of situational awareness.
The word switch doesn't change the fact that Falcon's point is entirely comprehensible. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9402
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:29:00 -
[634] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Like I said, I'm picking nits (English idiom for fussy fault finding. Comes from the days of having people pick lice off of you instead of bathing).
That definition you proposed is basically the definition of situational awareness.
The word switch doesn't change the fact that Falcon's point is entirely comprehensible.
I know the phrase, lived in the U.S. for a while now, just get stuff mixed up sometimes, and my grammar is never going to not suck. I also lament the loss of my accent a while back.
But yes, I agree that it's basically not debatable as to the crux of his statement. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
295
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:19:00 -
[635] - Quote
How many times does an actual DEV need to tell these people they are doing it wrong, ffs. |

Glathull
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
645
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:25:00 -
[636] - Quote
You know what's pathetic about all the threads like these? Just a very slight change in wording would fix the whole thing.
If you told the whiners that Concord would rep them if they were still alive when the big C showed up, everyone would be all over it. Just keep your ship alive until C gets there.
The carequeens would be all "Suck it, gankmaggots! Don't f*** with the Jesus! I have goddamn epic tank on my . . . I don't even know what the mining ships are called. Doesn't matter because Concord is REPPING my ass!"
Of course, the situation isn't really very different now, right? Just survive until Concord. That's it! You have one job! I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon |

Xer Jin
Ancient Anomaly and Artifacts Recovery Explorators
111
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:33:00 -
[637] - Quote
FALCON PUNCH!!! |

Aeana K
Open University of Celestial Hardship Art of War Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:43:00 -
[638] - Quote
Your anger will pass away after some time, soon. Remember that there is not even a single person in this game that has never done a big mistake. What is important however, is the advice given to you.
1) never fit a BR for tank. That was a bad advice given to you. Fit for agility. Stealth is your tank, as it is already said.
2) Always check the issuer. If you see many fails in his hauler contracts do not take the mission.
3) Always check the cargo. If its value is close to the collateral, it is not a trap. As BRs are scan-proof, no one will touch you (99.9%) if you fly carefully.
4) In the case you accept a contract with low price cargo, fit a fast frigate, and make an ista-undock in the starting station and an insta-dock in the destination station, then return and do the mission. With more than 6AUs/s in your BR, only ceptors can hunt you, but even in this case they cant do much if you cloack-warp carefuly.
5) It is practically impossible to have insta docks and undocks in every station, but have one in all major hubs.
6) make an alt with BR flying skills, in the same account, to subcontract the dengerous curiers. It takes about 2 PLEXs additional time. It was a bad advice to subcontract all the contracts, it takes lots of time.
7) Never fly AFK.
8) **** can happen, and always happens. Do not take the game so seriously. Take a pint, watch a movie, hug your gf, and come back in the game with a smile.
That's my 2 cent |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24249
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:44:00 -
[639] - Quote
GǪSoGǪ He punched the guy so hard that the resulting explosion propagated hundreds of thousands of light-years in a matter of seconds.
That's gotta smart. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Derrick Miles
EVENumbers
4536
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:56:00 -
[640] - Quote
How is there two threads and 150 pages of the same stuff over and over again? |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9404
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 08:58:00 -
[641] - Quote
Derrick Miles wrote:How is there two threads and 150 pages of the same stuff over and over again?
Because some people find it easier to butt their heads against their computer screen screaming and frothing at the mouth about how the very developers of this game are wrong, than admit that they themselves might be wrong. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 09:33:00 -
[642] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
One of my pet concepts is that players should be allowed to use NPC for tasks whose opportunity cost is too high for a human player. Say, bringing NPC anti-gank right when you need it, for a price that compensates the loss inflicted on gankers. Would you spend a 500 millon one-shot NPC anti-gank to laugh at a flight of ganknados? Would you gank if you knew that X is known for using NPC anti-ganks? (These are rhetorical questions, btw)
Hi Indah, Maybe you've quit this thread already.. lol. I don't blame you in the slightest. I believe we should consider all the implications of your suggestion.
- If you can hire a 500m NPC, can't the gankers do the same? A gankfleet already has a CONCORD deterrent for anyone who may want to preemptively attack them. Now they have a protector. Is this wise?
- How effective should these guys be? How can they possibly *prevent* a fleet of high alpha/high DPS boats from killing you? There is no unit in the game that can currently do that (prevent.. not punish an entire gank squad)
- Are people going to start bringing these into lowsec/nullsec roams?
- Aren't you just describing a very powerful Drone? Aren't the Golems a bit on the border of being overpowered? Do you think we should have more powerful Drones than Golems?
- Wouldn't these NPCs be like Drones except you don't have to skill up in anything for them?
- Do you think a particularly rich Alliance or Corp could afford more of these NPCs than a lone freighter pilot? Do you know how much money CODE. is sitting on top of? How many of these NPCs could be afforded by 400b ISK?
Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
I think that adresses all your questions. It's a single use defensive device whose effect is to protect the victim (but only in hisec and only if the agressors are perfoming an ilegal attack) and then pins and destroys any agressor until CONCORD comes and finishes the job.
Obviously, a second gang could still finish the victim even with CONCORD present, but then nobody is 100% safe in New Eden...
Special case: the victim is alphaed. That doesn't matter, as the pod still can trigger the response and avenge his loss, then warp out before the 99.9% resists fade. Technically, that would lead to the gankers being killmailed by a pod, which would be a sort of a hilarious honor badge for everyone involved. 
(Lore mumbojumbo: sleeping response teams would be stationed around each planet/moon and would be "microcynoed" in by a "ground station" responding to the same lore system that sends in CONCORD)
(Coding of the feature: the foundation woud be the CONCORD code with additional exceptions, but all effects are already ingame. Art assets would imply the mines themselves as the rest of the system would not be displayed) The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9408
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 09:36:00 -
[643] - Quote
Good heavens no.
This game needs *less* NPC handholding, not more. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Unleashed Pestilence
986
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 09:52:00 -
[644] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors. I think that adresses all your questions. It's a single use defensive device whose effect is to protect the victim (but only in hisec and only if the agressors are perfoming an ilegal attack) and then pins and destroys any agressor until CONCORD comes and finishes the job. Obviously, a second gang could still finish the victim even with CONCORD present, but then nobody is 100% safe in New Eden... Special case: the victim is alphaed. That doesn't matter, as the pod still can trigger the response and avenge his loss, then warp out before the 99.9% resists fade. Technically, that would lead to the gankers being killmailed by a pod, which would be a sort of a hilarious honor badge for everyone involved. 
Ironically I think this would backfire completely and actually make ganking easier. Consider what happens at super high resists, and the likelyhood that this would trigger 100%+ resists. Also, players are already disrupted when gaining a criminal flag. I'm not sure what the point of shutting off ganker microwarpdrives is.
Giving the players access to a 150K damage weapon is idiotic though.
New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5420
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 09:57:00 -
[645] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game")
Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this.
Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary.
Here are two incredibly effective freighter protection modules (best used in conjunction with each other): Reinforced Bulkheads II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
They have the advantage of already being in the game and not wildly broken. They have the disadvantage of not being useable by someone unwilling to bring a second pilot with them to help defend against a group of 10+ pilots. Of course, a single pilot not being able to successfully defend themselves against an organized group of 10+ pilots is not super surprising. 
Here are some fits that make use of them:
[Daredevil, Freighter Protection]
Power Diagnostic System II Damage Control II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 400mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I 1MN Afterburner II
[Empty High slot] [Empty High slot] [Empty High slot]
Small Targeting System Subcontroller II Small Targeting System Subcontroller I Small Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer II
[Charon, Tank]
Reinforced Bulkheads II Reinforced Bulkheads II Reinforced Bulkheads II
NB: I am not saying that these are the *only* fits that use these freighter protection modules, nor that these are the *best* fits that use these freighter protection modules, nor that they are the most cost effective fits that use these freighter protection modules. Simply that these fits use those modules to great effect. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 09:58:00 -
[646] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Good heavens no.
This game needs *less* NPC handholding, not more.
Read my post again and turn off the grrr carebears grrr this time. It is LESS hand-holding than CONCORD as it must be manually triggered. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
92
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:02:00 -
[647] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock. Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene.
This is an interesting suggestion, I have a few questions about the mechanics that I need clarification on:
1. What is your definition of "victim". How would CCP be able to take your definition and apply it to the current mechanics? If a neutral player sees a freighter being ganked on a gate and activates a jamming module on ganker pilot a and then is engaged by ganker pilot b is the nuetral party neutral, an aggressor, or a victim? What if the original ganker was legitimately at war with the freighter pilot? 2. What is your definition of "bump". How would you differentiate between natural and frequently occurring bumps on a station undock during conflict and deliberate attempts to disable warp? 3. How would CCP be able to stop bump abuse? If I had an expensive load to move (say $25bil plus) in a freighter over a small distance, say under 10 jumps, and this mechanism was made available, I would use neutral alts to engage my own freighter to ensure it was unbumpable after each jump.
I do not mean to be harshly critical, however, your proposal displays a limited understanding of the impact of altering simple mechanics, which also implies limited understanding of current mechanics. Looking at the scenario you have suggested you are suggesting that an Orca that has been attacked and whose tank has held through the initial gank attempt runs the risk of being bumped repeatedly by friends of the original ganker for 15 minutes continuously without concord intervention upon which the original attackers will return to reattempt to gank the Orca.
This method of attack, ie a ganking group holds back a percentage of forces from original attack to maintain bumping ability for 15 minutes after the target has survived the initial attack seems very inefficient. It means a deliberate reduction in DPS which increases the odds in the targets favour. It also means increasing the isk cost of the gank by approximately 100%. It also requires an increase in the technical ability of the group conducting the attack.
Why should single pilot who is emplying no defensive strategies utilising other pilots be given a leg up over a larger diverse group who are working in an extremely organised and detailed manner? |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:02:00 -
[648] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this. Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary.
Please, tell me how would you abuse the idea, I may have overlooked something.  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4470
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:03:00 -
[649] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Good heavens no.
This game needs *less* NPC handholding, not more. Read my post again and turn off the grrr carebears grrr this time. It is LESS hand-holding than CONCORD as it must be manually triggered. That doesn't change anything, CONCORD define npc hand holding. =][= |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
92
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:05:00 -
[650] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Good heavens no.
This game needs *less* NPC handholding, not more. Read my post again and turn off the grrr carebears grrr this time. It is LESS hand-holding than CONCORD as it must be manually triggered.
So ganking of AFK would go unpunished or just punished by Concord?
The abuse options are awesome. A group of 100 pilots could crash the servers.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9408
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:05:00 -
[651] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Good heavens no.
This game needs *less* NPC handholding, not more. Read my post again and turn off the grrr carebears grrr this time. It is LESS hand-holding than CONCORD as it must be manually triggered.
And?
I mean, unless you are proposing that CONCORD itself be removed to make way for your module, you are still adding even more hand holding to the game, and even more safety to highsec.
And both of those are things that must be avoided at any cost. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
92
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:08:00 -
[652] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this. Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary. Please, tell me how would you abuse the idea, I may have overlooked something. 
I log in with x number of alts and position them on a pipe gate, I use alt 1 (in an imparior) to attack alt 2 in a tornado. Alt 2 now has a gank machine with 99% resists ready to hit anything it can alpha until concord arrive. |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4471
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:12:00 -
[653] - Quote
Also This vvIndahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors. I think that adresses all your questions. It's a single use defensive device whose effect is to protect the victim (but only in hisec and only if the agressors are perfoming an ilegal attack) and then pins and destroys any agressor until CONCORD comes and finishes the job. Obviously, a second gang could still finish the victim even with CONCORD present, but then nobody is 100% safe in New Eden... Special case: the victim is alphaed. That doesn't matter, as the pod still can trigger the response and avenge his loss, then warp out before the 99.9% resists fade. Technically, that would lead to the gankers being killmailed by a pod, which would be a sort of a hilarious honor badge for everyone involved.  (Lore mumbojumbo: sleeping response teams would be stationed around each planet/moon and would be "microcynoed" in by a "ground station" responding to the same lore system that sends in CONCORD) (Coding of the feature: the foundation woud be the CONCORD code with additional exceptions, but all effects are already ingame. Art assets would imply the mines themselves as the rest of the system would not be displayed) Is flat out Heresy to the Gods of H.T.F.U and a care bare will be executed for it. =][= |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5421
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:19:00 -
[654] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this. Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary. Please, tell me how would you abuse the idea, I may have overlooked something. 
By using it to make my ship invulnerable in any number of situations where invulnerability is useful.
Now, go ahead and answer my question: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9410
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:21:00 -
[655] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game")
I got five million that says the answer will be either "because new players!" or some form of "you shouldn't force people to PvP if they don't want to". "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Dave Stark
6785
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:22:00 -
[656] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Good heavens no.
This game needs *less* NPC handholding, not more. Read my post again and turn off the grrr carebears grrr this time. It is LESS hand-holding than CONCORD as it must be manually triggered.
your idea just promotes botting. |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:31:00 -
[657] - Quote
Cancel Align NOW wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this. Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary. Please, tell me how would you abuse the idea, I may have overlooked something.  I log in with x number of alts and position them on a pipe gate, I use alt 1 (in an imparior) to attack alt 2 in a tornado. Alt 2 now has a gank machine with 99% resists ready to hit anything it can alpha until concord arrive.
Safeguard to loophole 1: sequence is averted and effects are cancelled if the target gains a criminal flag. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3848
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:33:00 -
[658] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: dear lord. i thought you were going to suggest an npc that does the work of players, which is bad enough. but this is ridiculous. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3848
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:35:00 -
[659] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:And again our two favorite nullsec supporters appear on the scene to troll and derail any thread that might suggest some kind of reasonable and fair level of protection for players in highsec.
your argument was beaten several times, and you had the opportunity to exit gracefully. that opportunity has expired. learn from this in the future. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12883
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:39:00 -
[660] - Quote
It is amazing the amount of time people put into trying to get ganking nerfed over actually taking a minute to fit a tank and getting a friend to help them out. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:46:00 -
[661] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this. Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary. Please, tell me how would you abuse the idea, I may have overlooked something.  By using it to make my ship invulnerable in any number of situations where invulnerability is useful. Now, go ahead and answer my question: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game")
Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12885
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:49:00 -
[662] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win.
You honestly think a fleet shouldn't be able to kill one semi afk guy with no tank or situational awareness? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20583
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:52:00 -
[663] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Cancel Align NOW wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Use conditions: system security must be above 0.5. Player security status must be above 0.0. Trigger condition: someone has locked the player, has opened fire on him and has triggered a criminal flag on himself. Trigger: manual activation. Environmental effects: 99.9% resists to player. Any player who earns a criminal flag after attacking the player is 100% scrambled. Effects last for 10 seconds. NPC spawn (RT-1 seconds after activation, where RT = CONCORD response time): FoF mines. One mine is spawned for each agressor and inflicts 150,000 alpha damage on it. The subsequent CONCORD spawn will wipe any survivors.
First: Why should a single pilot have an item that requires no effort whatsoever to use which gives them a guaranteed win against an organized group of 10+ pilots specifically kitted out to beat them? (being at your keyboard isn't "effort" it's "playing the game") Second: Gimme an alt (or 5) in a newb ship and I'll be abusing the hell out of this. Even ignoring the hilarious abuse guaranteed to come from your ridiculous magic invulnerability button, it's entirely unnecessary. Please, tell me how would you abuse the idea, I may have overlooked something.  I log in with x number of alts and position them on a pipe gate, I use alt 1 (in an imparior) to attack alt 2 in a tornado. Alt 2 now has a gank machine with 99% resists ready to hit anything it can alpha until concord arrive. Safeguard to loophole 1: sequence is averted and effects are cancelled if the target gains a criminal flag. You do know that you can blap people without gaining a criminal flag right?
You're idea is terrible, exploitable, brings no value to the game and falls under the auspices of Malcanis' law.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Dave Stark
6786
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:53:00 -
[664] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered?
this takes stupidity to a whole new level. |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 10:57:00 -
[665] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win.
You honestly think a fleet shouldn't be able to kill one semi afk guy with no tank or situational awareness?
If he can press the button before being dead, then he was not semi-afk nor lacked situational awareness... and if the fleet can't kill a guy semi-afk and no idea of what's going on before he can hit the button, well... how's that the guy's fault?
But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4473
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:01:00 -
[666] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win.
You honestly think a fleet shouldn't be able to kill one semi afk guy with no tank or situational awareness? If he can press the button before being dead, then he was not semi-afk nor lacked situational awareness... and if the fleet can't kill a guy semi-afk and no idea of what's going on before he can hit the button, well... how's that the guy's fault? But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? Are you drunk? =][= |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12889
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:03:00 -
[667] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win.
You honestly think a fleet shouldn't be able to kill one semi afk guy with no tank or situational awareness? If he can press the button before being dead, then he was not semi-afk nor lacked situational awareness... and if the fleet can't kill a guy semi-afk and no idea of what's going on before he can hit the button, well... how's that the guy's fault? But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer?
Because the other ganker put in more planning and effort than the "victim".
Your plan would screw up a lot of fleets doing other activities just so little Jimmy can run around with an I win mod. Hell I used to pvp in haulers, I have tanked small fleets with them and driven them off grid. What you want is a fail safe I win mod that will 100% protect you from entire fleets. No, you can have that overpowered monstrosity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:03:00 -
[668] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? this takes stupidity to a whole new level.
OK, you called me stupid, YOU WIN! 
(Now answer, why should outnumbering be a failproof tactic?) The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20585
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:04:00 -
[669] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? I'll bite.
Firstly because one guy is always going to be outnumbered by more than one guy, it's the pretty much the definition of the word  outnumber (-îa-èt-ên-îmb+Ö) vb 1. (tr) to exceed in number
Secondly because nothing is 100% guaranteed in Eve, including safety.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Dave Stark
6789
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:10:00 -
[670] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? this takes stupidity to a whole new level. OK, you called me stupid, YOU WIN!  (Now answer, why should outnumbering be a failproof tactic?)
actually, I didn't call you stupid.
if, all other things being equal, the n+1 force can't beat 1 man, that means nobody will ever lose their ship. now, take one second to consider the implication of no ships ever being lost in eve from this point on. please tell me you see why your point is monumentally terrible? |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:11:00 -
[671] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win.
You honestly think a fleet shouldn't be able to kill one semi afk guy with no tank or situational awareness? If he can press the button before being dead, then he was not semi-afk nor lacked situational awareness... and if the fleet can't kill a guy semi-afk and no idea of what's going on before he can hit the button, well... how's that the guy's fault? But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? Because the other ganker put in more planning and effort than the "victim". Your plan would screw up a lot of fleets doing other activities just so little Jimmy can run around with an I win mod. Hell I used to pvp in haulers, I have tanked small fleets with them and driven them off grid. What you want is a fail safe I win mod that will 100% protect you from entire fleets. No, you can have that overpowered monstrosity.
If you want to catch litle jimmy, wardec him first. That will render the button useless as you will not get a criminal flag for attacking him. And who knows -maybe at 500 million a pop, neutral jimmy just may prefer to lose his ship and let CONCORD deal with you for free, authomatically and completely fail-safely. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12892
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:14:00 -
[672] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
If you want to catch litle jimmy, wardec him first.
Oh hey this guy has 300 mil in an untanked frigate, I'll pirate this ship. *clicks wardec, you have 24 hours to wait* Oh wait he docked 23 hours and 59 minutes before I could engage...
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: That will render the button useless as you will not get a criminal flag for attacking him. And who knows -maybe at 500 million a pop, neutral jimmy just may prefer to lose his ship and let CONCORD deal with you for free, authomatically and completely fail-safely.
You just killed the entire pirate profession and made NPC hauling 100% safe. You broke EVE badly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Dave Stark
6789
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:15:00 -
[673] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
If you want to catch litle jimmy, wardec him first.
Oh hey this guy has 300 mil in an untanked frigate, I'll pirate this ship. *clicks wardec, you have 24 hours to wait* Oh wait he docked 23 hours and 59 minutes before I could engage...
wrong. you failed to wardec little jimmy because he's in the NPC corp. |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1107
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:18:00 -
[674] - Quote
"To be able to kill a target you must wardec them, which coupled with the nerfing of wardecs will ultimately result in the extinction of your playstyle. This will be the sixth mmo we have destroyed, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it."
Exceedingly stupid thread, 10/10, would lose faith in humanity over again. [witty image] - Stream |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:20:00 -
[675] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? I'll bite. Firstly because one ship is always going to be outnumbered by more than one ship, regardless of the mechanism of providing those numbers; it's the pretty much the definition of the word  outnumber (-îa-èt-ên-îmb+Ö) vb 1. (tr) to exceed in number Secondly because nothing, except getting blapped by Concord for certain offences in highsec, is 100% guaranteed in Eve, including safety. Nor should it be. If you want guaranteed safety, you're playing the wrong game.
If you read carefully, and understood what I wrote, you will notice how the system I proposed just doubles that of CONCORD, but with even less power.
It is not authomatic; it will not oneshot some ships; it will not destroy pods; it costs a lot of money to use; and it will not be of use in any situation where the agressors would not die to CONCORD just one second later.
The only advantage is that the resist guarantees the survival of the prey if he can press the button fast enough. Yet it's not a "I win" button, rather a "I survive" button.
And yet a second gank fleet could alpha the victim even with CONCORD around...  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9413
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:21:00 -
[676] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: If you want to catch litle jimmy, wardec him first.
No.
Not just no, but **** no. You do not get to just eliminate other methods of PvP, to leave the single most ineffective one remaining.
God, the entitlement is sickening. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1107
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:25:00 -
[677] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:It is not authomatic; Spoken like a true bot-aspirant; the world breaks down into the black and white of afk and not, and anything which requires the immense burden of actually being at the keyboard represents the highest mastery of internet spaceships. [witty image] - Stream |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
23
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:27:00 -
[678] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Not sure if you have been following, but I suggested that gank victims get 60 seconds of immunity from bumping so they can fly off. In other words, I can render my Freighter perfectly safe by shooting it with a noobship. Why should someone shooting you make you suddenly incorporeal? Again, Bumping is not a crime in New Eden. Remember, this is a legal system where vigilante retribution is legal, mass murder of non-capsuleers is either ignored or encouraged, etc. Not sure what "safe" means - the invulnerability would start once CONCORD arrives, at which point your ship is supposed to be "safe." (note that you could still be shot). And the fact that bumping is not in general a crime does not mean that when bumping is used to achieve the exact same effect as warp scrambling (which is, and everyone agrees should be a crime), that it should not be treated as a crime.
bumping =/= scrambling. YOUR inability to play the game makes you see it as such, but believe me there are TONS of ways to prevent you getting in that spot in the first place, and if you do get bumped, there are still numerous ways to get urself safe, though these require you to think logically and use ur brain; something allot of the carebears refuse to do as they want handholding levels of safety. seriously, go play my little pony adventures if you really want to make high sec into the handholding place you want it to be. CCP are very clear; youre never 100% safe, however if you use the tools you've been given you could be pretty damn safe to the level where ganking wouldnt be all that viable. its the lazy/bad/dumb people we thrive on, not the ones with a brain. |

Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
675
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:27:00 -
[679] - Quote
Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat.
This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10.

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake. |

Dave Stark
6793
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:28:00 -
[680] - Quote
Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10. 
the problem is, you have to take the bait lest CCP actually start considering some of these delusions. |

Pepper Swift
The Vendunari End of Life
33951
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:29:00 -
[681] - Quote
Why are we still discusion this tropic When life gives you melons you might be-ádyslexic. Racial clothing on any character? Yes please
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9414
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:30:00 -
[682] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10.  the problem is, you have to take the bait lest CCP actually start considering some of these delusions.
Not only that, but when you have "trolled" so well that people can't tell the difference between the trolling and the genuine shitposting, who are actually trolling?
Never go full ******. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12895
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:31:00 -
[683] - Quote
Pepper Swift wrote:Why are we still discusion this tropic
I know right? Anti suicide ganking agitators are like a cancer of EVE. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20586
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:32:00 -
[684] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? I'll bite. Firstly because one ship is always going to be outnumbered by more than one ship, regardless of the mechanism of providing those numbers; it's the pretty much the definition of the word  outnumber (-îa-èt-ên-îmb+Ö) vb 1. (tr) to exceed in number Secondly because nothing, except getting blapped by Concord for certain offences in highsec, is 100% guaranteed in Eve, including safety. Nor should it be. If you want guaranteed safety, you're playing the wrong game. If you read carefully, and understood what I wrote, you will notice how the system I proposed just doubles that of CONCORD, but with even less power. It is not authomatic; it will not oneshot some ships; it will not destroy pods; it costs a lot of money to use; and it will not be of use in any situation where the agressors would not die to CONCORD just one second later. The only advantage is that the resist guarantees the survival of the prey if he can press the button fast enough. Yet it's not a "I win" button, rather a "I survive" button. And yet a second gank fleet could alpha the victim even with CONCORD around...  So it's ISK tanking under the guise of press butan, receive a temporary Polaris resist profile? No, just no. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Nitchiu
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:33:00 -
[685] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:The only advantage is that the resist guarantees the survival of the prey if he can press the button fast enough. Yet it's not a "I win" button, rather a "I survive" button. And yet a second gank fleet could alpha the victim even with CONCORD around... 
In Eve I survive is the definition of I win.
Now here's a couple of scenarios where your idea fails.
1.) I have wardecced a corp. I get an alt to attack me getting the I win button then proceed to kill my war target in a completly unpreventable way.
2.) I shoot myself with an alt. Press button steal someone's can or loot someone's wreck from a gank. I am invulnerable to those who would try to stop me.
And yes you could find solutions to those issues but you would cause more and more and make the game even more confusing for those poor newbies who can't figure out how to put a tank on a freighter. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12895
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:33:00 -
[686] - Quote
Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10. 
We have learned that you must beat down every bad idea, no matter how stupid, lest CCP take it seriously. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
23
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:35:00 -
[687] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:But i will reverse your special case question: why should someone die after tanking to 100% of his ship capability, stay 100% aware and YET be outnumbered by a guy with a ISBOxer? I'll bite. Firstly because one ship is always going to be outnumbered by more than one ship, regardless of the mechanism of providing those numbers; it's the pretty much the definition of the word  outnumber (-îa-èt-ên-îmb+Ö) vb 1. (tr) to exceed in number Secondly because nothing, except getting blapped by Concord for certain offences in highsec, is 100% guaranteed in Eve, including safety. Nor should it be. If you want guaranteed safety, you're playing the wrong game. If you read carefully, and understood what I wrote, you will notice how the system I proposed just doubles that of CONCORD, but with even less power. It is not authomatic; it will not oneshot some ships; it will not destroy pods; it costs a lot of money to use; and it will not be of use in any situation where the agressors would not die to CONCORD just one second later. The only advantage is that the resist guarantees the survival of the prey if he can press the button fast enough. Yet it's not a "I win" button, rather a "I survive" button. And yet a second gank fleet could alpha the victim even with CONCORD around... 
seriously, someone who lets himself get bumped deserves to be ******* shot into pieces. youre wanting an i-win button for people who are shite at the game. STAPH IT YOU FOOL.
|

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:36:00 -
[688] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
If you want to catch litle jimmy, wardec him first.
Oh hey this guy has 300 mil in an untanked frigate, I'll pirate this ship. *clicks wardec, you have 24 hours to wait* Oh wait he docked 23 hours and 59 minutes before I could engage... Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: That will render the button useless as you will not get a criminal flag for attacking him. And who knows -maybe at 500 million a pop, neutral jimmy just may prefer to lose his ship and let CONCORD deal with you for free, authomatically and completely fail-safely.
You just killed the entire pirate profession and made NPC hauling 100% safe. You broke EVE badly.
Why? The only difference with CONCORD is that the victim may actually survive the first attack. A second fleet still can alpha him right under the noses of CONCORD.
And then, back to where this whole discussion started:
Complete and unavoidable waste of your effort caused by the action of the adversary should be a possibility both for agressors and defenders. So far, only the defenders take that chance. As I said above, that's OK with CCP and they will not do anything to change the game, so you all can rest assured that I am just wasting my time and effort. The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
675
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:40:00 -
[689] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10.  We have learned that you must beat down every bad idea, no matter how stupid, lest CCP take it seriously.
Yeah, you're def right about this. Our game gets broken for all the wrong reasons when these things slip under the radar.
.
They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3852
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 11:56:00 -
[690] - Quote
Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10.  nope. genuine carebear. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20588
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 12:04:00 -
[691] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10.  nope. genuine carebear. Genuine something, not sure carebear even begins to cover it.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 12:54:00 -
[692] - Quote
Belt Scout wrote:baltec1 wrote:Belt Scout wrote:Wow guys. Not only did you all take the bait, you also gulped down the line, the fishing pole, and half of the boat. This is a perfect example of trolling at it's finest. Good job Indahmawar Fazmarai. 12/10.  We have learned that you must beat down every bad idea, no matter how stupid, lest CCP take it seriously. Yeah, you're def right about this. Our game gets broken for all the wrong reasons when these things slip under the radar. .
Well, that's because of CCP's long standing habit to not ask the people who actually uses the features and iterate them to suit to someone else.
It goes like this: Thinking man asks a developer to iterate feature X, (say, wormholes) by a given date Developer struggles to figure a way to iterate wormholes, without checking any wormhole player because of *secrecy* Developer presents the concept to the best of his knowledge, but without any actual wormholer input Thinking man approves and schedules developer for a second task after iterating wormholes Developer presents the concept to CSM CSM panics and say no, no, no, take that back to the drawing board Developer notices he won't meet the release date if he's back to the drawing board, so he says yes, yes, yes CSM says no, no, no Developer asks Thinking man, who notices how a delay in wormholes for Hyperion will **** up feature #2 for Oceanus, so CCP says yes, yes, yes CSM says no, no, no Affected CSM suffers a heart attack, but struggles to say let's negotiate CCP and CSM negotiate but the feature is essentially pushed forward to F&I discussion F&I panics, suffers a heart attack and produces a threadnaught full of of fear and loathing Developer says yes, yes, yes F&I say no, no no Feature (say, wormholes) is slaughtered as planned and some players unsub, some stop using it (and eventually unsub) and nobody bothers to exploit the new features because they never cared of that niche Success!
It doesn't take anyone suggesting anything stupid to wreak havoc on a feature, it's just CCP at work as usual. Just wait until they iterate something you like.  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12902
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 13:05:00 -
[693] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Why? The only difference with CONCORD is that the victim may actually survive the first attack. A second fleet still can alpha him right under the noses of CONCORD.
And then, back to where this whole discussion started:
Complete and unavoidable waste of your effort caused by the action of the adversary should be a possibility both for agressors and defenders. So far, only the defenders take that chance. As I said above, that's OK with CCP and they will not do anything to change the game, so you all can rest assured that I am just wasting my time and effort.
This would only be true if gank ships were free and none of the penalties for doing a gank exist.
The victim can already survive a gank, it just requires some actual thought other than "lets transport this 300 mil in goods in an untanked frigate". Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 13:38:00 -
[694] - Quote
Paul Maken wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Nothing's changed for 11 years. That's not true. There have been several changes. Some made ganking harder: 1.) The change to deny insurance payout to people who get CONCORDOKKEN had a big impact. Gankers went from paying for 30% of a hull to paying for 100%, which has been an extra 30-50m in cost to the gankers depending on where the hull price has fluctuated. 2.) The recent change giving freighters low slots lets you get far more EHP than was possible previously. This both lets you move more valuable cargos safely, but it also means that the gankers need to get a ship scan of freighters as well as a cargo scan. 3.) Kill rights can now be made available/sold. It used to be that if you ganked a hauling/industrial character then the kill right they got was almost meaningless. Now, when you get a kill right on you it actually does matter. Others have made ganking easier: 4.) The addition of the Tier 3 battlecruisers, especially the high alpha of the Tornadoes, reduced the cost of ganking with fewer larger ships until the insurance change came to balance that out. 5.) The ability to buy back security status with tags made it possible for profitable ganking to be sustained by buying tags instead of needing to spend a lot of time ratting back up above -5. This makes the loss of security status less of a penalty than it used to be. Overall, the changes have balanced out to keep the risk/reward relationships in check. When CCP lets us trade killrights for a look at who the alt characters on an account are risk will equal reward, and not a second sooner. the reason gankers gank with impunity is that you cannot hit them back on their other characters that benefit from it. i'm planning to start ganking myself someday because why not kill people at random then pay for 17 PLEXes with their money and efforts when it can never be traced back to the characters on those accounts that i actually use for other things? thanks for making it all possible, ccp. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 13:47:00 -
[695] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:When CCP lets us trade killrights for a look at who the alt characters on an account are risk will equal reward, and not a second sooner.
so when ccp lets you trade killrights for random unrelated pilot names, that'll have an effect on risk vs reward?
i don't think so. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 14:35:00 -
[696] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:When CCP lets us trade killrights for a look at who the alt characters on an account are risk will equal reward, and not a second sooner. so when ccp lets you trade killrights for random unrelated pilot names, that'll have an effect on risk vs reward? i don't think so. unrelated? i guess, except for the fact that any profits made likely wouldn't be kept on the ganker character once it had sufficient reserves to keep ganking. spend an hour doing missions for 40 mil isk or spend 10 minutes stealing 200 mil from someone else. it really isn't a hard choice to make. and hiding where that cash is going behind an alt created solely for ganking is simple common sense. until the person piloting that ship can be held accountable for their actions on any other character, though, there is no risk and only reward. lets not delude ourselves here. you want to nuke my frieghter or orca? that's fine. show me where yours is too so i can return the favor. of course none of them will do that. that would be fair, that would be not being a griefing ****. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 14:52:00 -
[697] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:This would only be true if gank ships were free and none of the penalties for doing a gank exist.
What penalty? a sec status hit? meaningless. losing a cheap throw away ship? meaningless. getting a kill right on a ganker character? meaningless. someone stacking bounty on you? meaningless.
being a ganker makes all of those a moot point, because it only takes one fat juicy target worth 2 bil to make any amount of all of those worthwhile. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:11:00 -
[698] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:baltec1 wrote:This would only be true if gank ships were free and none of the penalties for doing a gank exist.
What penalty? a sec status hit? meaningless. losing a cheap throw away ship? meaningless. getting a kill right on a ganker character? meaningless. someone stacking bounty on you? meaningless. being a ganker makes all of those a moot point, because it only takes one fat juicy target worth 2 bil to make any amount of all of those worthwhile.
Average cost for a gank nado is 80 mil, at -10 you can be killed by anyone, no insurance, killrights can be claimed at any time by anyone, the risk of failing to gank is always there, you can expect at least 50% of the cargo to not drop, you can have your own hauler attacked, your gank ship is ironically profitable to gank. I can go on.
The risks and punishments are in place as are the multiple ways to protect yourself from a pirate. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:15:00 -
[699] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:When CCP lets us trade killrights for a look at who the alt characters on an account are risk will equal reward, and not a second sooner. so when ccp lets you trade killrights for random unrelated pilot names, that'll have an effect on risk vs reward? i don't think so. unrelated? i guess, except for the fact that any profits made likely wouldn't be kept on the ganker character once it had sufficient reserves to keep ganking. spend an hour doing missions for 40 mil isk or spend 10 minutes stealing 200 mil from someone else. it really isn't a hard choice to make. and hiding where that cash is going behind an alt created solely for ganking is simple common sense. until the person piloting that ship can be held accountable for their actions on any other character, though, there is no risk and only reward. lets not delude ourselves here. you want to nuke my frieghter or orca? that's fine. show me where yours is too so i can return the favor. of course none of them will do that. that would be fair, that would be not being a griefing ****.
or alternatively. you could stop being lazy and clueless and stop asking ccp to do your work for you.
if he found yours using nothing but the ingame tools, you can find his the same way.
stop making excuses for wanting ccp to hold your hand in theirs while their other hand feeds you from a silver spoon. it's pathetic and quite frankly it's insulting that you think people are foolish enough to believe that this is for "fairness". |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:16:00 -
[700] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:When CCP lets us trade killrights for a look at who the alt characters on an account are risk will equal reward, and not a second sooner. so when ccp lets you trade killrights for random unrelated pilot names, that'll have an effect on risk vs reward? i don't think so. unrelated? i guess, except for the fact that any profits made likely wouldn't be kept on the ganker character once it had sufficient reserves to keep ganking. spend an hour doing missions for 40 mil isk or spend 10 minutes stealing 200 mil from someone else. it really isn't a hard choice to make. and hiding where that cash is going behind an alt created solely for ganking is simple common sense. until the person piloting that ship can be held accountable for their actions on any other character, though, there is no risk and only reward. lets not delude ourselves here. you want to nuke my frieghter or orca? that's fine. show me where yours is too so i can return the favor. of course none of them will do that. that would be fair, that would be not being a griefing ****. or alternatively. you could stop being lazy and clueless and stop asking ccp to do your work for you. if he found yours using nothing but the ingame tools, you can find his the same way. stop making excuses for wanting ccp to hold your hand in theirs while their other hand feeds you from a silver spoon. it's pathetic and quite frankly it's insulting that you think people are foolish enough to believe that this is for "fairness". whats the matter, scared of the shoe being on the other foot? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:24:00 -
[701] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:When CCP lets us trade killrights for a look at who the alt characters on an account are risk will equal reward, and not a second sooner. so when ccp lets you trade killrights for random unrelated pilot names, that'll have an effect on risk vs reward? i don't think so. unrelated? i guess, except for the fact that any profits made likely wouldn't be kept on the ganker character once it had sufficient reserves to keep ganking. spend an hour doing missions for 40 mil isk or spend 10 minutes stealing 200 mil from someone else. it really isn't a hard choice to make. and hiding where that cash is going behind an alt created solely for ganking is simple common sense. until the person piloting that ship can be held accountable for their actions on any other character, though, there is no risk and only reward. lets not delude ourselves here. you want to nuke my frieghter or orca? that's fine. show me where yours is too so i can return the favor. of course none of them will do that. that would be fair, that would be not being a griefing ****. or alternatively. you could stop being lazy and clueless and stop asking ccp to do your work for you. if he found yours using nothing but the ingame tools, you can find his the same way. stop making excuses for wanting ccp to hold your hand in theirs while their other hand feeds you from a silver spoon. it's pathetic and quite frankly it's insulting that you think people are foolish enough to believe that this is for "fairness". whats the matter, scared of the shoe being on the other foot? then again it may be more fun to infiltrate code, use the ingame tools to find who else they play and take away the payback-less ganking. that's not a bad idea you've got there. they've definitely pissed off enough people to build an intel network with.
like i said, if i can find you without ccp holding my hand, you can find me the same way. the shoe IS on the other foot.
with all the whining, bawling, and begging to ccp... the only people that are scared are those unwilling to engage their brain. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:32:00 -
[702] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote: like i said, if i can find you without ccp holding my hand, you can find me the same way. the shoe IS on the other foot.
with all the whining, bawling, and begging to ccp... the only people that are scared are those unwilling to engage their brain.
^ true that.
i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

David Mandrake
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:35:00 -
[703] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd" If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you.
I haven't read through the rest of this thread yet, so maybe someone else has come up with this... but if you do everything right you have a webbing alt. If you've still gotten bumped, refit to a scram with a mobile depot (You can burn 50 away from the gate quick) and by the time you've done that, Freighter should be close to/out of range of the sentries. Set alt to orbit the Mach, safties off, web/scram and now it can't bump for awhile. Freighter can either warp off now, or at the very least CONCORD will show up and that'll mean at least one ganker will instadie (or they have to waste time to get CONCORD repositioned which you can use to try to escape again, etc). Sure your alt takes a sec hit and gets killrights but it takes little time to train a second alt and wait out the killright. Unless the Mach pilot engages the alt, in which case, no killright. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:37:00 -
[704] - Quote
David Mandrake wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd" If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you. I haven't read through the rest of this thread yet, so maybe someone else has come up with this... but if you do everything right you have a webbing alt. If you've still gotten bumped, refit to a scram with a mobile depot (You can burn 50 away from the gate quick) and by the time you've done that, Freighter should be close to/out of range of the sentries. Set alt to orbit the Mach, safties off, web/scram and now it can't bump for awhile. Freighter can either warp off now, or at the very least CONCORD will show up and that'll mean at least one ganker will instadie (or they have to waste time to get CONCORD repositioned which you can use to try to escape again, etc). Sure your alt takes a sec hit and gets killrights but it takes little time to train a second alt and wait out the killright. Unless the Mach pilot engages the alt, in which case, no killright. ^ problem with that, they don't just bring one mach. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:43:00 -
[705] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote: like i said, if i can find you without ccp holding my hand, you can find me the same way. the shoe IS on the other foot.
with all the whining, bawling, and begging to ccp... the only people that are scared are those unwilling to engage their brain.
^ true that. i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content.
except, as every high sec industrialist with a brain knows... high sec wardecs are trivial to avoid. That's why people suicide gank industrialists rather than wardec them.
depending on how strict we're defining what a merc is... you're going to want to hire suicide gankers not mercs. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
24
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:49:00 -
[706] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote: like i said, if i can find you without ccp holding my hand, you can find me the same way. the shoe IS on the other foot.
with all the whining, bawling, and begging to ccp... the only people that are scared are those unwilling to engage their brain.
^ true that. i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content.
hahahahahahhaha. ur so funny |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:51:00 -
[707] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction. 
First off, I'm fairly neutral to the whole issue here. I'm actually all-for highsec ganking. But your logic is flawed and pretty much straight-up trolling. Not that I have a problem with that normally, but it's inappropriate for a representative of CCP, at least in my opinion.
You seem to keep indicating that the level of risk vs. reward for crime is somehow "fair", and that the concord response is comparable to the preventative measures of real world police. But this really isn't the case. Real world police are much less predictable and create a wave of fear among the populace that concord does not.
If you rob a store in the US, you may end up with 5 years in prison, or a life sentence. Your IRL life could be completely destroyed. You may easily suffer being brutalized. The police might plant a weapon on you and then just flat out shoot you. There are constantly cases of unarmed civilians being killed by police during the commission of a minor crime.
The equivalent of this in EVE would be if you podded someone in highsec, you might just happen to randomly end up being biomassed, unable to use stargates for months, or with a negative wallet.
The difference here is that somehow sec status drop and ship destruction are presented as a risk to a ship that is *designed to be destroyed* on a character that *doesn't use sec status*. So there is no real risk.
Again, I don't particularly *care*. The whole miner bumping suicide-ganking issue has never really affected me, and CCP has the right to lay down the hammer and run the game however they want to, which is fine.
Just don't pretend that it's a microcosm of real world risk-vs-reward situations when CONCORD are the most themepark element of the game.
TL;DR: Need RND in punishments Not a forum alt.-á |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20594
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:54:00 -
[708] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content. The industrial backbone of the game relies on players making things explode, the thinking industrialists, who incidentally don't tend to explode, are making isk hand over fist from the activities of groups like CODE..
You're also forgetting that gankers are interested in other things too, I know for a fact that several suicide gankers have alts that are in the business of manufacturing mining ships, haulers, and combat ships, as well as their associated modules.They are creating a demand for their alts products. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 15:59:00 -
[709] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Syn Shi wrote:There is no risk to gank in hi-sec. The ships they use are so cheap and easy to replace the whole risk thing has been circumvented.
Ship blows up, so what...just buy another.
Everyone knows your name, no probelm just buy another character.
The game is so saturated with isk that isk has removed the risk factor. Tell that to all the guys who suicide gank someone, and end up making a heavy loss because everything they wanted to loot gets destroyed in the ship destruction.  First off, I'm fairly neutral to the whole issue here. I'm actually all-for highsec ganking. But your logic is flawed and pretty much straight-up trolling. Not that I have a problem with that normally, but it's inappropriate for a representative of CCP, at least in my opinion. You seem to keep indicating that the level of risk vs. reward for crime is somehow "fair", and that the concord response is comparable to the preventative measures of real world police. But this really isn't the case. Real world police are much less predictable and create a wave of fear among the populace that concord does not. If you rob a store in the US, you may end up with 5 years in prison, or a life sentence. Your IRL life could be completely destroyed. You may easily suffer being brutalized. The police might plant a weapon on you and then just flat out shoot you. There are constantly cases of unarmed civilians being killed by police during the commission of a minor crime. The equivalent of this in EVE would be if you podded someone in highsec, you might just happen to randomly end up being biomassed, unable to use stargates for months, or with a negative wallet. The difference here is that somehow sec status drop and ship destruction are presented as a risk to a ship that is *designed to be destroyed* on a character that *doesn't use sec status*. So there is no real risk. Again, I don't particularly *care*. The whole miner bumping suicide-ganking issue has never really affected me, and CCP has the right to lay down the hammer and run the game however they want to, which is fine. Just don't pretend that it's a microcosm of real world risk-vs-reward situations when CONCORD are the most themepark element of the game. TL;DR: Need RND in punishments in addendum, if you were found to be part of an organized group of people harassing others, you'd get slapped with RICO and they'd take down everyone. atleast in the US. also in real life you can't recreate yourself with new dna for a clean identity, forensics and no statute of limitations would catch up to you eventually. this all assumes the cops don't just shoot you in the face, which lately wouldn't be a safe bet.
*sighs wistfully* if only concord were so gung ho, instead of being lazy pantywaists that show up after everyone is dead and write reports. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:00:00 -
[710] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:David Mandrake wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd" If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you. I haven't read through the rest of this thread yet, so maybe someone else has come up with this... but if you do everything right you have a webbing alt. If you've still gotten bumped, refit to a scram with a mobile depot (You can burn 50 away from the gate quick) and by the time you've done that, Freighter should be close to/out of range of the sentries. Set alt to orbit the Mach, safties off, web/scram and now it can't bump for awhile. Freighter can either warp off now, or at the very least CONCORD will show up and that'll mean at least one ganker will instadie (or they have to waste time to get CONCORD repositioned which you can use to try to escape again, etc). Sure your alt takes a sec hit and gets killrights but it takes little time to train a second alt and wait out the killright. Unless the Mach pilot engages the alt, in which case, no killright. ^ problem with that, they don't just bring one mach.
So pre spawn concord with an alt. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:04:00 -
[711] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote:David Mandrake wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:I say fair play to him if he cuts a profit from someone who's half-assed a ship fitting and AFK hauled across space with a sizeable chunk of ISK in their hold. I think you mean "Previously fitting-less freighters which get bumped away from gates and sentry guns by previously inconspicuous 100mn MWD plated macharials without ever getting aggression until you get alpha'd" If people don't bother fitting tank, and AFK their cargo, I'm fine with them dying. What pisses me off is how you can still do everything right and you'll still die, because game mechanics are against you. I haven't read through the rest of this thread yet, so maybe someone else has come up with this... but if you do everything right you have a webbing alt. If you've still gotten bumped, refit to a scram with a mobile depot (You can burn 50 away from the gate quick) and by the time you've done that, Freighter should be close to/out of range of the sentries. Set alt to orbit the Mach, safties off, web/scram and now it can't bump for awhile. Freighter can either warp off now, or at the very least CONCORD will show up and that'll mean at least one ganker will instadie (or they have to waste time to get CONCORD repositioned which you can use to try to escape again, etc). Sure your alt takes a sec hit and gets killrights but it takes little time to train a second alt and wait out the killright. Unless the Mach pilot engages the alt, in which case, no killright. ^ problem with that, they don't just bring one mach. So pre spawn concord with an alt. so you want me to pre-spawn concord in every system along a whole corridor where i'm going to be travelling with a freighter? that's your answer? you expect us to possibly break the EULA and get banned for littering the servers to mitigate your activities? and then you talk about risk versus reward with the next breath. you're amusing, guy. :] Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:07:00 -
[712] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. They're not. CODE mainly goes after people who mine AFK. Those people aren't producing any ISK and they're not the backbone of anything.
The industrial backbone of the game trivially avoids and evades such simplistic schemes as CODE and slurp up ISK by the bucket-load from those who produce it. Nothing of any real consequence is lost by CODE's presence.
Quote:so you want me to pre-spawn concord in every system along a whole corridor where i'm going to be travelling with a freighter? that's your answer? you expect us to possibly break the EULA and get banned for littering the servers to mitigate your activities? Who said anything of the kind? You just ruin the gank and make the bumping all for nought by ensuring that, should the shooting start, they won't have enough people on hand to actually do anything. No corridors needed; no EULA violations needed; just some common sense in your application of mechanics. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:08:00 -
[713] - Quote
Demonfist wrote: so you want me to pre-spawn concord in every system along a whole corridor where i'm going to be travelling with a freighter? that's your answer? you expect us to possibly break the EULA and get banned for littering the servers to mitigate your activities? and then you talk about risk versus reward with the next breath. you're amusing, guy. :]
Or just do it where the machs are because you aren't dumb?
Seriously, use your noggin. Half of these gankers can be shot on site. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:12:00 -
[714] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Seriously, use your noggin.
the frequent duplication of threads like this means that's never going to happen. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:16:00 -
[715] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: so you want me to pre-spawn concord in every system along a whole corridor where i'm going to be travelling with a freighter? that's your answer? you expect us to possibly break the EULA and get banned for littering the servers to mitigate your activities? and then you talk about risk versus reward with the next breath. you're amusing, guy. :]
Or just do it where the machs are because you aren't dumb? Seriously, use your noggin. Half of these gankers can be shot on site. do it where the machs are, they move. do it where they move, they move again. the net effect is a whole corridor of spawned concord and ccp getting miffed about server resources. of course if that's how they want us to respond because they won't respond any other way, we can do that. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:17:00 -
[716] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:do it where the machs are, they move. do it where they move, they move again. Ehm. Again, use your noggin'. If they moved, you can just leave. If you do it as a scout, the way is now open for the hauler to fly straight through. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:20:00 -
[717] - Quote
Demonfist wrote: do it where the machs are, they move. do it where they move, they move again. the net effect is a whole corridor of spawned concord and ccp getting miffed about server resources. of course if that's how they want us to respond because they won't act on it any other way, we can do that.
Putting aside your lack of understanding of concord mechanics lets do something else then.
Have a number of logi ships in tow of the freighter. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:20:00 -
[718] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:do it where the machs are, they move. do it where they move, they move again. Ehm. Again, use your noggin'. If they moved, you can just leave. if they moved it isn't because they've stopped planning to do what they're planning to do. the only way to do that is deny them anywhere to do it completely. which, thankfully, ccp has provided a mechanic for. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:21:00 -
[719] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:if they moved it isn't because they've stopped planning to do what they're planning to do. Who cares? They've been neutralised and can now be skipped over. Mission accomplished. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:23:00 -
[720] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: do it where the machs are, they move. do it where they move, they move again. the net effect is a whole corridor of spawned concord and ccp getting miffed about server resources. of course if that's how they want us to respond because they won't act on it any other way, we can do that.
Putting aside your lack of understanding of concord mechanics lets do something else then. Have a number of logi ships in tow of the freighter. that might work if they hadn't shown a willingness to throw more than 2 dozen ships at targets at a time. the question is is that really what we want eve to evolve into? every freighter needing logi escorts to trump waves of gankers? is that the image you want new players to see around them daily? retention rates would be abysmal, even compared to how horrific they already are. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:25:00 -
[721] - Quote
Demonfist wrote: that might work if they hadn't shown a willingness to throw more than 2 dozen ships at targets at a time. the question is is that really what we want eve to evolve into? every freighter needing logi escorts to trump waves of gankers? is that the image you want new players to see around them daily? retention rates would be abysmal, even compared to how horrific they already are.
They attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:26:00 -
[722] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:if they moved it isn't because they've stopped planning to do what they're planning to do. Who cares? They've been neutralised and can now be skipped over. Mission accomplished. yes, and if after DT every day entire corridors of concord were spawned we'd have free reign to peacefully transport things for the whole day. i'm seeing that as good risk versus reward, myself. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:27:00 -
[723] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:yes, and if after DT every day entire corridors of concord were spawned we'd have free reign to peacefully transport things for the whole day. That's exactly why it doesn't happen (nor would it actually work that way). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:27:00 -
[724] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: that might work if they hadn't shown a willingness to throw more than 2 dozen ships at targets at a time. the question is is that really what we want eve to evolve into? every freighter needing logi escorts to trump waves of gankers? is that the image you want new players to see around them daily? retention rates would be abysmal, even compared to how horrific they already are.
They attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:28:00 -
[725] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice? So? That's not a prerequisite for forming a fleet for your own protection. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:28:00 -
[726] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:yes, and if after DT every day entire corridors of concord were spawned we'd have free reign to peacefully transport things for the whole day. That's exactly why it doesn't happen (nor would it actually work that way). so give us a choice of not changing that. because it could start happening. :] Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:29:00 -
[727] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice? So? That's not a prerequisite for forming a fleet for your own protection. having people willing to join is. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:29:00 -
[728] - Quote
Demonfist wrote: because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice?
Because you need 20,000 people to have 2-3 logi support you Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:30:00 -
[729] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:having people willing to join is. So that was a pretty nonsensical red herring then, and we're back at the original question: they attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:31:00 -
[730] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice?
Because you need 20,000 people to have 2-3 logi support you  when eve has 30,000 people online? yes. yes it does. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20596
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:31:00 -
[731] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:yes, and if after DT every day entire corridors of concord were spawned we'd have free reign to peacefully transport things for the whole day. That's exactly why it doesn't happen (nor would it actually work that way). so give us a choice of not changing that. because it could start happening. :] You have access to the exact same tools as everybody else, it's your own fault if you can't find the toolbox.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:31:00 -
[732] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:when eve has 30,000 people online? yes. yes it does. No. Come up with a better argument because that one is just idiotic.
Oh andQuote:so give us a choice of not changing that. because it could start happening. GǪyou already have a choice. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:33:00 -
[733] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice?
Because you need 20,000 people to have 2-3 logi support you  when eve has 30,000 people online? yes. yes it does.
You just want to be a victim all your life don't you? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:33:00 -
[734] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:having people willing to join is. So that was a pretty nonsensical red herring then, and we're back at the original question: they attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? it's not bad. we can have a game where nothing moves without a fleet of escorts. supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. my point is is that really the eve we want to have? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:34:00 -
[735] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote:baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice?
Because you need 20,000 people to have 2-3 logi support you  when eve has 30,000 people online? yes. yes it does. You just want to be a victim all your life don't you? no. only up to the point i break and go frank castle on them. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:34:00 -
[736] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: that might work if they hadn't shown a willingness to throw more than 2 dozen ships at targets at a time. the question is is that really what we want eve to evolve into? every freighter needing logi escorts to trump waves of gankers? is that the image you want new players to see around them daily? retention rates would be abysmal, even compared to how horrific they already are.
They attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice?
and? you're not playing a single player game. just because they're not part of your alliance doesn't mean you can't be in a fleet with them.
these excuses are getting flimsier and flimsier. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:35:00 -
[737] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:it's not bad. Good. So everything is pretty much as it should be then.
Quote:supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. Why would any of that happen?
Quote:my point is is that really the eve we want to have? It would be a lot more balanced, that's for sure so yes, why not?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:38:00 -
[738] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=Demonfist]it's not bad. Good. So everything is pretty much as it should be then.
Quote:supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. Why would any of that happen? you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later.
the next time PLEXes go up another 100million, factor in the cost associated with ganking making that happen. merchants aren't going to eat the cost of that freighter you just sank, they're going to pass it along to you the consumer. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:41:00 -
[739] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later.
that might be true, if people had to transport a minimum of like 5bn isk of stuff per trip and were always profitable to gank.
unfortunately, that isn't the case and your argument falls flat on it's face. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:42:00 -
[740] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. You have no argument, obviously, since you have to use fallacies to fill in the gaps in order to try (and fail) to stay in the conversation.
Quote:when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up GǪso more people start doing it, so supply goes up and prices go back down again. So if you're going to accuse people of not understanding something, make sure you've actually thought through what the effects are that you are desperately hoping for.
And of course, that's all assuming that you need more effort to transport stuff, and that less stuff would be transported, which is based onGǪ ohGǪ pretty much nothing as well.
Quote:if you want to force people to bring support fleets GǪwhich no-one is doing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:42:00 -
[741] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. that might be true, if people had to transport a minimum of like 5bn isk of stuff per trip and were always profitable to gank. unfortunately, that isn't the case and your argument falls flat on it's face. using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. see above post about costs being passed along. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Carmen Electra
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
3582
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:43:00 -
[742] - Quote
Good morning, Tippia how are you? eve is dying |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:44:00 -
[743] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. Incorrect. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:46:00 -
[744] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:[quote=Demonfist]it's not bad. Good. So everything is pretty much as it should be then. Quote:supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. Why would any of that happen? you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. the next time PLEXes go up another 100million, factor in the cost associated with ganking making that happen. merchants aren't going to eat the cost of that freighter you just sank, they're going to pass it along to you the consumer.
Plex have nothing to do with ganking. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:46:00 -
[745] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. Incorrect. you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20596
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:47:00 -
[746] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. that might be true, if people had to transport a minimum of like 5bn isk of stuff per trip and were always profitable to gank. unfortunately, that isn't the case and your argument falls flat on it's face. using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. see above post about costs being passed along. You're wrong, you're forgetting to take the loot fairy into account, and she is an evil female dog.
If none of the expensive stuff drops the gankers are in the red iskwise, the only green is on their killboard. The only profit in this scenario is indirect, and only if the gankers manage to sell a replacement ship to their victim.
Quote:you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Except in the case of a freighter it's not one 10M isk ship, it's in the tens if you're using T2 Catalysts. If you're using Talos' or 'Nados the cost ramps up even further. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:47:00 -
[747] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:[quote=Demonfist]it's not bad. Good. So everything is pretty much as it should be then. Quote:supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. Why would any of that happen? you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. the next time PLEXes go up another 100million, factor in the cost associated with ganking making that happen. merchants aren't going to eat the cost of that freighter you just sank, they're going to pass it along to you the consumer. Plex have nothing to do with ganking. PLEX are the yardstick of the eve economy. when ganking takes a toll it's price will shift. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:47:00 -
[748] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. Incorrect. you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll?
Show me a freighter that only took 10 mil to bring down. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12903
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:48:00 -
[749] - Quote
Demonfist wrote: PLEX are the yardstick of the eve economy. when ganking takes a toll it's price will shift.
No it wont. PLEX demand has nothing to do with ganking at all. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:48:00 -
[750] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. that might be true, if people had to transport a minimum of like 5bn isk of stuff per trip and were always profitable to gank. unfortunately, that isn't the case and your argument falls flat on it's face. using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. see above post about costs being passed along. You're wrong, you're forgetting to take the loot fairy into account, and she is an evil female dog. If none of the expensive stuff drops the gankers are in the red iskwise, the only green is on their killboard. The only profit in this scenario is indirect, and only if the gankers manage to sell a replacement ship to their victim. this assumes that you need to take any of the contents of the ship in order for killing it to be worthwhile, which isn't how things are in eve. costing the other person is also a motivation. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:49:00 -
[751] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: PLEX are the yardstick of the eve economy. when ganking takes a toll it's price will shift.
No it wont. PLEX demand has nothing to do with ganking at all. you might want to compare it's prices with incidences of burn jita events and rethink your stance. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:50:00 -
[752] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Setting aside that your scenario is impossible, are you sure you want to use this unfamiliarity with the concept of GÇ£profitGÇ¥ as your argument?
Quote:PLEX are the yardstick of the eve economy. No, they really aren't. They're just a something players like to whine about. The yardstick for the EVE economy is the GPU. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:50:00 -
[753] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. Incorrect. you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Show me a freighter that only took 10 mil to bring down. show me the point you missed. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:51:00 -
[754] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Setting aside that your scenario is impossible, are you sure you want to use this unfamiliarity with the concept of GÇ£profitGÇ¥ as your argument? Quote:PLEX are the yardstick of the eve economy. No, they really aren't. They're just a something players like to whine about. The yardstick for the EVE economy is the GPU. in eve pvp costing the other guy more IS profit. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20596
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:51:00 -
[755] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:this assumes that you need to take any of the contents of the ship in order for killing it to be worthwhile, which isn't how things are in eve. costing the other person is also a motivation. You said nothing about it being worthwhile, you specifically used the word "profitable".
The words profitable and worthwhile do not mean the same thing.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:52:00 -
[756] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:show me the point you missed. In other words: you can't. You know your argument has failed and now you're desperately grabbing for yet another red herring.
Quote:in eve pvp costing the other guy more IS profit. Incorrect. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Dave Stark
6794
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:52:00 -
[757] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. that might be true, if people had to transport a minimum of like 5bn isk of stuff per trip and were always profitable to gank. unfortunately, that isn't the case and your argument falls flat on it's face. using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. see above post about costs being passed along.
remind me again how using anything, 10m or not, is profitable when a freighter is empty?
as much as i'd love to sit here and point out the hilarious flaws in every single post of yours, it gets boring when people keep making the same incorrect arguments over and over. surely you people should have come up with some new fantasies instead of repeating the same incorrect arguments in EVERY thread that you start whining in? |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:53:00 -
[758] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:you don't understand how supply and demand works, obviously. so here i'll explain it. when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up, because there aren't less people wanting it. if you want to force people to bring support fleets to make the economy work that's fine and dandy, just don't ***** about paying the price for your own mess later. that might be true, if people had to transport a minimum of like 5bn isk of stuff per trip and were always profitable to gank. unfortunately, that isn't the case and your argument falls flat on it's face. using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. see above post about costs being passed along. remind me again how using anything, 10m or not, is profitable when a freighter is empty? as much as i'd love to sit here and point out the hilarious flaws in every single post of yours, it gets boring when people keep making the same incorrect arguments over and over. surely you people should have come up with some new fantasies instead of repeating the same incorrect arguments in EVERY thread that you start whining in? because you're the one building replacement freighters. the guy that got sunk either has to pay you or stop his former trade. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:55:00 -
[759] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:because you're the one building replacement freighters. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Dave Stark
6795
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:56:00 -
[760] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:because you're the one building replacement freighters. the guy that got sunk either has to pay you or stop his former trade.
except you said taking down a freighter was profitable. not building freighters. make up your mind.
are we talking about shooting freighters, or building them? |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:57:00 -
[761] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:because you're the one building replacement freighters. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. your english comprehension skills are too poor for me to continue discussion with you. have a nice day. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:58:00 -
[762] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:because you're the one building replacement freighters. the guy that got sunk either has to pay you or stop his former trade. except you said taking down a freighter was profitable. not building freighters. make up your mind. are we talking about shooting freighters, or building them? connect the dots and get back to me. kkthxbai. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Noobshot Elongur
Spirits of Essence Yulai Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 16:58:00 -
[763] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote:Last night my hauling ship got blown sky high. I was flying a prorator and doing some deliveries. The person that shot me down organised it really well by setting up contracts and sucking in the person accepting the contract. I wont go into detail here. As i was making the delivery and just 1 second from being docked into station my ship got blown sky high. From what ? a minmitar Battleship that was so many km's away. It took 2 people to stop me.
I keep hearing that ccp wil be doing something about this. I've just had enough of it. Seriously I'm trying to find some fun in this game and seeing that the others always have the edge over miners and haulers in high sec is a real joke. I don't mind if it had happened in low sec and null but when your playing by ccp rules to me it seems there are no rules and high sec is really a joke.
At the very least give miners and haulers some big guns like you give others and maybe will balance things well.
The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
cheers
You could always try to learn to be a better pilot, skill up, build a ship that has more tank, and haul/mine with friends in a fleet.... Seriously you're coming off like a special snowflake that Activision/Blizzard likes to encourage in their crap-tastic MMO. |

Dave Stark
6795
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:00:00 -
[764] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:because you're the one building replacement freighters. the guy that got sunk either has to pay you or stop his former trade. except you said taking down a freighter was profitable. not building freighters. make up your mind. are we talking about shooting freighters, or building them? connect the dots and get back to me. kkthxbai.
or, you could answer the question. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:01:00 -
[765] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:your english comprehension skills are too poor for me to continue discussion with you. have a nice day. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy.
Quote:connect the dots and get back to me. kkthxbai. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy.
You lost the argument and you know. Inventing more and more nonsense to cover up for the previous nonsense makes it more nonsensical, not less, you know that, right? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:02:00 -
[766] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:your english comprehension skills are too poor for me to continue discussion with you. have a nice day. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. Quote:connect the dots and get back to me. kkthxbai. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You lost the argument and you know. Inventing more and more nonsense to cover up for the previous nonsense makes it more nonsensical, not less, you know that, right? i could never be as nonsensical as you, troll.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Mag's
the united
17778
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:05:00 -
[767] - Quote
Read the thread and loved it.
Falcon Punches 4TW. 
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:05:00 -
[768] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i could never be as nonsensical as you, troll.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Mag's
the united
17778
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:06:00 -
[769] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:your english comprehension skills are too poor for me to continue discussion with you. have a nice day. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. Quote:connect the dots and get back to me. kkthxbai. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You lost the argument and you know. Inventing more and more nonsense to cover up for the previous nonsense makes it more nonsensical, not less, you know that, right? i could never be as nonsensical as you, troll.  Except that Tippia isn't trolling and now you've resorted to name calling as you know you were wrong.
Just stop posting.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:06:00 -
[770] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i could never be as nonsensical as you, troll.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20598
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:08:00 -
[771] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i could never be as nonsensical as you, troll.  You're wrong and you know it, you've now stooped to the level of a toddler throwing a tantrum.
When you can demonstrate that you have an understanding of how the Eve economy works, people may take you seriously. At the moment your posting is the equivalent of a monkey throwing faeces at the wall. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:08:00 -
[772] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:your english comprehension skills are too poor for me to continue discussion with you. have a nice day. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. Quote:connect the dots and get back to me. kkthxbai. In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You lost the argument and you know. Inventing more and more nonsense to cover up for the previous nonsense makes it more nonsensical, not less, you know that, right? i could never be as nonsensical as you, troll.  Except that Tippia isn't trolling and now you've resorted to name calling as you know you were wrong. Just stop posting. i've resorted to name calling because it was earned. when someone chooses not to see sense under their nose trolling is the most likely cause. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24260
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:09:00 -
[773] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:09:00 -
[774] - Quote
i don't need to demonstrate anything. the numbers speak for me. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Mag's
the united
17779
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:10:00 -
[775] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Except that Tippia isn't trolling and now you've resorted to name calling as you know you were wrong.
Just stop posting. i've resorted to name calling because it was earned. when someone chooses not to see sense under their nose trolling is the most likely cause. We all know why you resorted to it. It's because you were wrong and have lost the argument.
The rest of your posting is now icing on that cake.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:10:00 -
[776] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. *pats on head and hands a lolli* run along now. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20598
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:11:00 -
[777] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:when someone chooses not to see sense under their nose trolling is the most likely cause. Speak for yourself.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:11:00 -
[778] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Except that Tippia isn't trolling and now you've resorted to name calling as you know you were wrong.
Just stop posting. i've resorted to name calling because it was earned. when someone chooses not to see sense under their nose trolling is the most likely cause. We all know why you resorted to it. It's because you were wrong and have lost the argument. The rest of your posting is now icing on that cake. cool story bro. i like cake. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:13:00 -
[779] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Demonfist wrote:when someone chooses not to see sense under their nose trolling is the most likely cause. Speak for yourself. Quote:i don't need to demonstrate anything. the numbers speak for me. What numbers would they be? i always do. thanks for the approval after the fact. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6796
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:13:00 -
[780] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i don't need to demonstrate anything. the numbers speak for me.
except they don't.
since you still haven't proven how ganking an empty freighter is profitable, as i asked you like... 2? pages ago. |

Mag's
the united
17779
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:13:00 -
[781] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. *pats on head and hands a lolli* run along now. Prime example.
If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24262
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:14:00 -
[782] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i don't need to demonstrate anything. the numbers speak for me. The numbers only numbers you've provided demonstrate that the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You understand this, right?
You lost the argument. You know this. That's why you have resorted to name-calling, evasions, and all the off-topic nonsense you've piled on for the last couple of pages. Just accept it and move on, preferably by presenting some kind of actual (supported) argument. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Gavin Dax
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:15:00 -
[783] - Quote
Glathull wrote:You know what's pathetic about all the threads like these? Just a very slight change in wording would fix the whole thing.
If you told the whiners that Concord would rep them if they were still alive when the big C showed up, everyone would be all over it. Just keep your ship alive until C gets there.
The carequeens would be all "Suck it, gankmaggots! Don't f*** with the Jesus! I have goddamn epic tank on my . . . I don't even know what the mining ships are called. Doesn't matter because Concord is REPPING my ass!"
Of course, the situation isn't really very different now, right? Just survive until Concord. That's it! You have one job!
Well if CONCORD repped instead it would give the target a chance to form a response (or for other players to come to the rescue, perhaps for a price, etc.). Conflict in HS that results in actual fights instead of ganks would be more fun IMO, just where the defender has the advantage of CONCORD on their side to make up for the fact that the aggressor gets ti choose the conditions for engagement.
Obviously, CONCORD response times would need to be better than they are now in order for more ships to be saved, and other things tweaked etc. but I wouldn't dismiss it as being the same thing or necessarily worse than what the mechanics are now. |

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
582
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:16:00 -
[784] - Quote
Demonfist you might want to put that shovel down since you seem to have bored a hole right through the entire planet and you still havent managed to make a coherent arguement that wasnt immediatly shot down in flames. Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin
you're welcome |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20599
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:16:00 -
[785] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Demonfist wrote:when someone chooses not to see sense under their nose trolling is the most likely cause. Speak for yourself. Quote:i don't need to demonstrate anything. the numbers speak for me. What numbers would they be? i always do. thanks for the approval after the fact. Whoosh was the sound you didn't hear because the post you quoted went so far over your head that it was skipping across the ionosphere.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5422
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:19:00 -
[786] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win.
Cost cannot be used to justify the introduction of unbalanced mechanics.
He isn't just outnumbered. He's outnumbered by a fleet specifically designed to kill him. Why should he get an i-win-button just for spending extra ISK?
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:(Now answer, why should outnumbering be a failproof tactic?)
It shouldn't be, it's not, and nobody said it should be or was. Straw men are bad, mmmkay?
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Complete and unavoidable waste of your effort caused by the action of the adversary should be a possibility both for agressors and defenders. So far, only the defenders take that chance. As I said above, that's OK with CCP and they will not do anything to change the game, so you all can rest assured that I am just wasting my time and effort.
And it is. If you web your freighter into warp, all the planning that went into setting up a gank for you is wasted. Just because you don't see the effort that's wasted doesn't mean it didn't occur.
Demonfist wrote:in addendum, if you were found to be part of an organized group of people harassing others, you'd get slapped with RICO and they'd take down everyone. atleast in the US. also in real life you can't recreate yourself with new dna for a clean identity, forensics and no statute of limitations would catch up to you eventually. this all assumes the cops don't just shoot you in the face, which lately wouldn't be a safe bet.
Racketeering, like many other things illegal in most RL jurisdictions, is legal in New Eden. Laws in different jurisdictions are different. CONCORD is *like* a police force, it is not *identical* to one. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:19:00 -
[787] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. *pats on head and hands a lolli* run along now. Prime example. If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable. i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6797
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:22:00 -
[788] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. *pats on head and hands a lolli* run along now. Prime example. If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable. i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere.
you didn't argue the point at all, you threw a tantrum like a toddler who's had his favourite dummy taken away from him.
what needed to be said was the answer to the myriad of questions put before you. none of them were. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24262
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:22:00 -
[789] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i argued the point. No, you didn't. You made a bunch of baseless claims that were immediately shot down. With nothing left to offer, you dived headlong into the fallacy ditch and started splashing about feebly.
Quote:what needed to be said was said. Indeed: the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You have demonstrated this with ample clarity. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Mag's
the united
17779
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:24:00 -
[790] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Prime example.
If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable. i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere. Yes we read your argument and it was wrong. But instead of backing it up and presenting more facts, you've thrown a tantrum and started name calling.
Now you refuse to show faith in what you said, because let's face it, it was wrong.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:24:00 -
[791] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i argued the point. No, you didn't. You made a bunch of baseless claims that were immediately shot down. With nothing left to offer, you dived headlong into the fallacy ditch and started splashing about feebly. Quote:what needed to be said was said. Indeed: the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You have demonstrated this with ample clarity. fixing some freshly beaten dead horse for dinner, huh? enjoy that. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24262
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:26:00 -
[792] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:fixing some freshly beaten dead horse for dinner, huh? enjoy that. So you agree, then, that the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. After all, you can't think of a single thing to say to suggest otherwise. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20602
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:26:00 -
[793] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're so cute when you wish you knew what you were talking about and were right.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. *pats on head and hands a lolli* run along now. Prime example. If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable. i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere. Your "point" is based on assumption and falsehood, with a large sprinkling of egotism. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:26:00 -
[794] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Prime example.
If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable. i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere. Yes we read your argument and it was wrong. But instead of backing it up and presenting more facts, you've thrown a tantrum and started name calling. Now you refuse to show faith in what you said, because let's face it, it was wrong. is it namecalling when the names fit? or simple recognition and acceptance of reality. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12904
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:27:00 -
[795] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote: PLEX are the yardstick of the eve economy. when ganking takes a toll it's price will shift.
No it wont. PLEX demand has nothing to do with ganking at all. you might want to compare it's prices with incidences of burn jita events and rethink your stance.
Given that I remember M0o and that they did more damage in a few hours than any burn jita did over three days I would say I am sure ganking has zero impact on plex prices. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5423
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:27:00 -
[796] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere.
So link, if you would, the post where you proved that your scenario was profitable. If you're using an alternate definition* of "profit," please also link to an independent source for that definition.
*For reference, wiktionary defines profit as "Total income or cash flow minus expenditures." and notes that "when the difference is negative the term loss is correct." "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Dave Stark
6798
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:27:00 -
[797] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i argued the point. No, you didn't. You made a bunch of baseless claims that were immediately shot down. With nothing left to offer, you dived headlong into the fallacy ditch and started splashing about feebly. Quote:what needed to be said was said. Indeed: the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You have demonstrated this with ample clarity. fixing some freshly beaten dead horse for dinner, huh? enjoy that.
we wouldn't have to keep beating it, if you'd just answer the questions that were put to you.
however, this thread has taken the predictable turn that after roughly 20 pages some clueless gank victim sympathiser comes along and makes baseless claims, gets told they're wrong, and has a tantrum and the thread gets derailed to a back and forth of;
people asking for proof of unfounded and hilariously flawed claims, and the clueless party having a tantrum saying he's right yet failing to produce any evidence what so ever. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20602
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:29:00 -
[798] - Quote
The plus point of beating a dead horse relentlessly is that the meat ends up nice and tender. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:29:00 -
[799] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i argued the point. No, you didn't. You made a bunch of baseless claims that were immediately shot down. With nothing left to offer, you dived headlong into the fallacy ditch and started splashing about feebly. Quote:what needed to be said was said. Indeed: the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. You have demonstrated this with ample clarity. fixing some freshly beaten dead horse for dinner, huh? enjoy that. we wouldn't have to keep beating it, if you'd just answer the questions that were put to you. however, this thread has taken the predictable turn that after roughly 20 pages some clueless gank victim sympathiser comes along and makes baseless claims, gets told they're wrong, and has a tantrum and the thread gets derailed to a back and forth of; people asking for proof of unfounded and hilariously flawed claims, and the clueless party having a tantrum saying he's right yet failing to produce any evidence what so ever. and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel over and over. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Mag's
the united
17779
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:30:00 -
[800] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Demonfist wrote:Mag's wrote:Prime example.
If you had any faith in your argument, you would argue the point. You would argue and show proof your scenario is profitable. i argued the point. what needed to be said was said. no more troll food will be dispensed, sorry you'll have to look elsewhere. Yes we read your argument and it was wrong. But instead of backing it up and presenting more facts, you've thrown a tantrum and started name calling. Now you refuse to show faith in what you said, because let's face it, it was wrong. is it namecalling when the names fit? or simple recognition and acceptance of reality. Yes it's name calling, because it doesn't fit with reality simply because you are wrong. This is why you are avoiding the argument and instead resorting to name calling.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24262
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:31:00 -
[801] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel very simple truth over and over. That is currently the only side of the argument, so what else is there to do but to repeat it and hope that you actually start discussing it again? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20602
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:31:00 -
[802] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel over and over. Once again, speak for yourself.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:33:00 -
[803] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:having people willing to join is. So that was a pretty nonsensical red herring then, and we're back at the original question: they attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? it's not bad. we can have a game where nothing moves without a fleet of escorts. supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. my point is is that really the eve we want to have?
You sir, are ********. no offense but you've got such little understanding of eve that it is utterly pointless to even further discuss anything you're saying. You've clearly shown you have absolutely NO understanding of any of these subjects. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:33:00 -
[804] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel very simple truth over and over. That is currently the only side of the argument, so what else is there to do but to repeat it and hope that you actually start discussing it again? i don't repeat myself for idiots and i don't feed trolls. you should give up hope, it will save time. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:35:00 -
[805] - Quote
Luukje wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:having people willing to join is. So that was a pretty nonsensical red herring then, and we're back at the original question: they attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? it's not bad. we can have a game where nothing moves without a fleet of escorts. supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. my point is is that really the eve we want to have? You sir, are ********. no offense but you've got such little understanding of eve that it is utterly pointless to even further discuss anything you're saying. You've clearly shown you have absolutely NO understanding of any of these subjects. you can stop anytime. i don't have a code alliance held to your head. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:38:00 -
[806] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel very simple truth over and over. That is currently the only side of the argument, so what else is there to do but to repeat it and hope that you actually start discussing it again? i don't repeat myself for idiots and i don't feed trolls. you should give up hope, it will save time.
You seem perfectly willing to repeat your name calling. Why shouldn't you be willing to link to the post where you proved what you claim that you proved? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
584
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:39:00 -
[807] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Luukje wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:having people willing to join is. So that was a pretty nonsensical red herring then, and we're back at the original question: they attacked you with a fleet, so why is it so bad to have a fleet of your own for protection? it's not bad. we can have a game where nothing moves without a fleet of escorts. supply will start to dry up, prices will skyrocket and eventually even the gankers will start to cry. my point is is that really the eve we want to have? You sir, are ********. no offense but you've got such little understanding of eve that it is utterly pointless to even further discuss anything you're saying. You've clearly shown you have absolutely NO understanding of any of these subjects. you can stop anytime. i don't have a code alliance held to your head.
No no, by all means keep humiliating yourself Demonfist, its actually quite funny.
Quick hint for you, flouncing off into the sunset loudly delcaring victory actually requires you to be right about something first. Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin
you're welcome |

Dave Stark
6800
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:40:00 -
[808] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel over and over.
we haven't turned a blind eye to anything.
the entire problem is you haven't even given us an answer that we could turn a blind eye to. we're still waiting for you to answer the questions we've put to you. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24264
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:40:00 -
[809] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i don't repeat myself for idiots and i don't feed trolls. you should give up hope, it will save time. No, I'm a very hopeful person. So my current hope is that you will realise that there is only one side of the argument, simply because you have failed to provide a second one.
I'm also hoping that you will realise the simple fact of what you've said so far: that the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy. Everything you've offered leads to this conclusion. If you want a different conclusion to be reached, you have to offer something new (and preferably something true). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20603
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:42:00 -
[810] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:and the other side of that argument turning a blind eye to everything that is said and repeating the same drivel very simple truth over and over. That is currently the only side of the argument, so what else is there to do but to repeat it and hope that you actually start discussing it again? i don't repeat myself for idiots and i don't feed trolls. you should give up hope, it will save time. You seem perfectly willing to repeat your name calling. Why shouldn't you be willing to link to the post where you proved what you claim that you proved? The name calling is the only thing left in his arsenal, everything else has been nuked by people who know what they're on about.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:44:00 -
[811] - Quote
Darek Castigatus wrote:No no, by all means keep humiliating yourself Demonfist, its actually quite funny.
Quick hint for you, flouncing off into the sunset loudly delcaring victory actually requires you to be right about something first. you mistake me for someone that thinks humility is a bad thing. and history is written by the person that bleeds less, what actually happens is usually mostly irrelevant. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24266
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:48:00 -
[812] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you mistake me for someone that thinks humility is a bad thing. So why don't you demonstrate some, accept the fact that you were wrong, and bow out of a discussion where you have been proven wrong and have nothing more to offer? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:50:00 -
[813] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you mistake me for someone that thinks humility is a bad thing. So why don't you demonstrate some, accept the fact that you were wrong, and bow out of a discussion where you have been proven wrong and have nothing more to offer? why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about, and bow out of a discussion where you've done nothing but say someone is wrong and offer nothing on why or how?
if you want to have an open discussion or debate i'm down for that. i will not respond to "no, you're wrong." "no, you're wrong." "no, you're wrong." 4 year olds do that. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:52:00 -
[814] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:The name calling is the only thing left in his arsenal, everything else has been nuked by the application of logic, and people who know what they're on about.
He's been Tippiadokkened. yeah, except no. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24266
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:55:00 -
[815] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about No, I don't do things that are based on lies. I've read what you've typed. None of it makes any sense, has any connection with reality, or supports what little suggestion of a point you might have had GÇö in fact, what you said directly contradicted and disproved your point.
How and why this happened has already been explained to you and everyone is now waiting you to either acknowledge this or offer up some kind of explanation for the discrepancies. Alternatively, you could offer some other kind of supporting argumentation to further the (very feeble) point you were making.
Or, as mentioned, you can just accept the simple fact that you're wrong. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20605
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:55:00 -
[816] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you mistake me for someone that thinks humility is a bad thing. So why don't you demonstrate some, accept the fact that you were wrong, and bow out of a discussion where you have been proven wrong and have nothing more to offer? why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about, and bow out of a discussion where you've done nothing but say someone is wrong and offer nothing on why or how?
Demonfist wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:The name calling is the only thing left in his arsenal, everything else has been nuked by the application of logic, and people who know what they're on about.
He's been Tippiadokkened. yeah, except no. Are you seriously so deluded that you actually believe the drivel you post?
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Talon SilverHawk
Ronin Cartel The G0dfathers
688
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:55:00 -
[817] - Quote
Its like all my favourite forum wh*res in the same place : ) awesome read
fight, fight , fight : P |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 17:58:00 -
[818] - Quote
Duchess Amarrian wrote: The two that got me are "Luukje" and "Natural CloneKiller". I put up a big bounty on Luk so enjoy your hunting.
Right here says it all... You don't have a clue about Eve game mechanics... This is why you died in the first place
Learn how to play and how game mechanics work.. If you don't you'll hate Eve... This applies to any game for that matter. |

virm pasuul
Mine 'N' Refine Yulai Federation
156
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:00:00 -
[819] - Quote
Demon when everyone else is telling you that you are wrong you are wrong you have two choices:
1 Sit back and have a think. Is it possible that I am wrong? Maybe so many people telling em I am wrong is a sign that something is wrong. - Down this path lies possible enlightenment. No one is always right. We all make mistakes. Know when you have made a mistake and learning from it is part of growing up and a sign of maturity.
2 Ignore everyone else in the whole world because you are right and everyone else is wrong. Stick you head in the sand, sing lalalala I can't hear you as loudly as you can. Insult people a lot in absence of any logical argument. This method is preferred by small children who don't know any better. This option whilst it may seem like a good idea is not. This option makes you look like a clueless idiot.
I advise option 1 although I think you have your heart set on option 2.
|

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:00:00 -
[820] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about No, I don't do things that are based on lies. lies. you're a funny troll. i like you. 
Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:01:00 -
[821] - Quote
virm pasuul wrote:Demon when everyone else is telling you that you are wrong you are wrong you have two choices:
1 Sit back and have a think. Is it possible that I am wrong? Maybe so many people telling em I am wrong is a sign that something is wrong. - Down this path lies possible enlightenment. No one is always right. We all make mistakes. Know when you have made a mistake and learning from it is part of growing up and a sign of maturity.
2 Ignore everyone else in the whole world because you are right and everyone else is wrong. Stick you head in the sand, sing lalalala I can't hear you as loudly as you can. Insult people a lot in absence of any logical argument. This method is preferred by small children who don't know any better. This option whilst it may seem like a good idea is not. This option makes you look like a clueless idiot.
I advise option 1 although I think you have your heart set on option 2.
everyone told einstein he was wrong. he ignored them. i think i'll pick option 3. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4484
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:02:00 -
[822] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. Incorrect. you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Show me a freighter that only took 10 mil to bring down. sorry , couldn't resist . =][= |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:03:00 -
[823] - Quote
everytime you say i'm wrong, this pops into my head...
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arther Schopenhauer Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6801
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:03:00 -
[824] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed. i did, you didn't type out how ganking empty freighters is profitable. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20607
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:03:00 -
[825] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i think i'll pick option 3. Would that be apologising to the tree that is tirelessy producing oxygen so that you can breath?
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:04:00 -
[826] - Quote
Demonfist, here's your first post in this thread:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4971902#post4971902
Here's a list of all your posts:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=search&postedby=Demonfist
If you could point to me the post where you claim to have proven your point, I'd appreciate it, because I can't find it. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24266
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:04:00 -
[827] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:lies. you're a funny troll. i like you.  In other words, the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and ganking is good for the economy.
Quote:everyone told einstein he was wrong. Incorrect. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:07:00 -
[828] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:everytime you say i'm wrong, this pops into my head...
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arther Schopenhauer
Being proven wrong in an entertaining manner is quite different than being ridiculed.
If you are so secure in the truth of your position, why aren't you willing to defend it? Arther Schopenhauer was perfectly willing to defend his positions, as evidenced by his successful defense of a doctoral dissertation, among (many) other papers. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20610
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:07:00 -
[829] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:baltec1 wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:using junk 10 mil isk ships to take down a freighter is never unprofitable. Incorrect. you're costing someone else 700million at a cost to yourself of 10million. are you really not that bright or simply a troll? Show me a freighter that only took 10 mil to bring down. sorry , couldn't resist  . lol nice kill, you should specify that it was a war kill not a gank though.
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:07:00 -
[830] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:virm pasuul wrote:Demon when everyone else is telling you that you are wrong you are wrong you have two choices:
1 Sit back and have a think. Is it possible that I am wrong? Maybe so many people telling em I am wrong is a sign that something is wrong. - Down this path lies possible enlightenment. No one is always right. We all make mistakes. Know when you have made a mistake and learning from it is part of growing up and a sign of maturity.
2 Ignore everyone else in the whole world because you are right and everyone else is wrong. Stick you head in the sand, sing lalalala I can't hear you as loudly as you can. Insult people a lot in absence of any logical argument. This method is preferred by small children who don't know any better. This option whilst it may seem like a good idea is not. This option makes you look like a clueless idiot.
I advise option 1 although I think you have your heart set on option 2.
everyone told einstein he was wrong. he ignored them. i think i'll pick option 3.
I almost spit my soda out...
You don't have a god complex at all... |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:11:00 -
[831] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:everyone told einstein he was wrong. he ignored them. i think i'll pick option 3.
The only time "everyone" told Einstein he was wrong was when he spent the last decade of his career trying to disprove quantum mechanics because "God doesn't play dice with the Universe." The fact that he ignored the scientific consensus meant that one of the greatest minds in human history was wasted for a decade because he didn't like the way the Universe actually works.
Oh, and he was no stranger to vigorously defending his positions on anything, either. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:11:00 -
[832] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:everytime you say i'm wrong, this pops into my head...
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arther Schopenhauer Being proven wrong in an entertaining manner is quite different than being ridiculed. If you are so secure in the truth of your position, why aren't you willing to defend it? Arther Schopenhauer was perfectly willing to defend his positions, as evidenced by his successful defense of a doctoral dissertation, among (many) other papers. i'd be happy to defend it and spell out my reasoning to someone that didn't take a page from the republican playbook of deny, obfuscate, propagandize.
Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Dave Stark
6801
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:12:00 -
[833] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:everytime you say i'm wrong, this pops into my head...
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arther Schopenhauer Being proven wrong in an entertaining manner is quite different than being ridiculed. If you are so secure in the truth of your position, why aren't you willing to defend it? Arther Schopenhauer was perfectly willing to defend his positions, as evidenced by his successful defense of a doctoral dissertation, among (many) other papers. i'd be happy to defend it and spell out my reasoning to someone that didn't take a page from the republican playbook of deny, obfuscate, propagandize.
clearly you wouldn't be happy to defend it, or you'd have done so pages ago when the questions were put to you. instead you threw your rattle out of the pram. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:12:00 -
[834] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i'd be happy to defend it and spell out my reasoning to someone that didn't take a page from the republican playbook of deny, obfuscate, propagandize.
My first response to you was simply asking for a link to your proof. Why weren't you happy to defend it then? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Studio Ghibli
Starstuff Industrial Rim Worlds Protectorate
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:13:00 -
[835] - Quote
Hi, I'm a Provi-resident.
I like to mine. I mine with friends. We mine together. I discovered that mining in high-sec is kind of dangerous, though.
This morning, I was mining with friends in Providence. I moved there a few years back.
While I was reading this article, an aggressive pilot was reported in a Brutix one system over. We continued to mine.
The Brutix jumped into our system. We continued to mine.
The Brutix warped to me and my miner-friends, and he webbed and scrammed me--so I webbed and scrammed him back, and all three of us deployed our drones against him, and two stealth bombers decloaked and started nailing him with torpedoes.
And then we continued to mine.
The moral of this story?
If you can't do what you're doing where you are, go somewhere where you can do what you want to do.
No one is forcing you to live up in high-sec. If high-sec is untenable, move somewhere else.
And demanding the game cater to your expectations is silly, especially, when it is no mystery that EVE is a very mean and unforgiving game.
Equipping guns is silly, for sure. So tank your ship, or fly a tankier ship. DSTs--not just for deep space anymore.
In other news, looking for more miners. :) |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24268
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:15:00 -
[836] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i'd be happy to defend it and spell out my reasoning Then stop waffling and do so.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Angeal MacNova
The Scope Gallente Federation
187
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:15:00 -
[837] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up GǪso more people start doing it, so supply goes up and prices go back down again. So if you're going to accuse people of not understanding something, make sure you've actually thought through what the effects are that you are desperately hoping for.
You can troll about a lot of things but to those like myself with an actual degree in economic, your attempts at the subject just come off as sad and pathetic.
He was semi right, just over simplified it. If the logistics involved become too excessive, the opportunity cost associated with it (along with the accounting cost associated with it) will push people out. I'm seeing the effects with my indy contacts who seem to have an increased interest in running L4s instead of mining.
It's called the supply/demand equilibrium and an increase to costs will cause a shift to the supply curve. The result is a new equilibrium at a higher price level and smaller moving quantity. With many of those previous suppliers moving toward running missions which generate new isk into the game. This will have a multiplier effect on the economies inflation rate as a whole and the player base as a whole is worse off.
Now you can dismiss as you which and reply as you like but keep in mind that your reply will be both dismissed and ignored (as in not replied to) on grounds that you quite obviously lack the education and experience on the subject for anything you have to say to hold any weight.
|

Crumplecorn
Eve Cluster Explorations
1108
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:15:00 -
[838] - Quote
Demonfist's avatar makes this all the better.
:popcorn: [witty image] - Stream |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:19:00 -
[839] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Tippia wrote:Quote:when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up GǪso more people start doing it, so supply goes up and prices go back down again. So if you're going to accuse people of not understanding something, make sure you've actually thought through what the effects are that you are desperately hoping for. You can troll about a lot of things but to those like myself with an actual degree in economic, your attempts at the subject just come off as sad and pathetic. He was semi right, just over simplified it. If the logistics involved become too excessive, the opportunity cost associated with it (along with the accounting cost associated with it) will push people out. I'm seeing the effects with my indy contacts who seem to have an increased interest in running L4s instead of mining. It's called the supply/demand equilibrium and an increase to costs will cause a shift to the supply curve. The result is a new equilibrium at a higher price level and smaller moving quantity. With many of those previous suppliers moving toward running missions which generate new isk into the game. This will have a multiplier effect on the economies inflation rate as a whole and the player base as a whole is worse off. Now you can dismiss as you which and reply as you like but keep in mind that your reply will be both dismissed and ignored (as in not replied to) on grounds that you quite obviously lack the education and experience on the subject for anything you have to say to hold any weight. i don't think i oversimplified enough, they still didn't get it.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24269
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:22:00 -
[840] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:You can troll about a lot of things but to those like myself with an actual degree in economic, your attempts at the subject just come off as sad and pathetic. So you agree then since you have to immediately go for the abuse rather than offer any kind of correction or insight.
Quote:He was semi right, just over simplified it. If the logistics involved become too excessive GǪwhich is where he got it wrong almost instantly. That's the whole point: he didn't just over-simplify it GÇö he made up a scenario that is so ridiculous that it has no bearing on the situation at hand, and then he draw that non-scenario to an incorrect and rather ignorant conclusion.
Quote:It's called the supply/demand equilibrium and an increase to costs will cause a shift to the supply curve. The result is a new equilibrium at a higher price level and smaller moving quantity. With many of those previous suppliers moving toward running missions which generate new isk into the game. This will have a multiplier effect on the economies inflation rate as a whole and the player base as a whole is worse off. Yes. And? His point is still incorrect because it rests of fundamentally flawed and baseless assumptions, namely that more fewer people will transport stuff. We already know this not to be the case GÇö people will happily fill any gap almost instantly and while there may be small disruptions in the market as a result of really concerted efforts such as hulkageddon or the isotope interdiction, the overproduction capacity and agility of the players involved means it bounces back pretty much instantlyGǪ at times while the supposedly disruptive effort is still going on.
Demonfist wrote:i don't think i oversimplified enough, they still didn't get it.  No, you didn't oversimplify it enough GÇö you were just wrong. People get it, they just also get that what you were saying was incorrect. This is the part you don't get, which is why you keep hearing that same phrase being repeated back to you over and over againGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5427
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:22:00 -
[841] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:He was semi right, just over simplified it. If the logistics involved become too excessive, the opportunity cost associated with it (along with the accounting cost associated with it) will push people out. I'm seeing the effects with my indy contacts who seem to have an increased interest in running L4s instead of mining.
Except that there is no evidence to suggest that ganking has ever, in recent history, made logistics particularly expensive. For example, RedFrog still operates with low, low prices, which implies that they very rarely get ganked, as those prices include an internal insurance pool against ganking.
Also "mining" and "industry" are very different things. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20610
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:23:00 -
[842] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Tippia wrote:Quote:when it takes more effort for people to start transporting stuff, less people will. when less people do, less stuff is available. when less stuff is available, the price goes up GǪso more people start doing it, so supply goes up and prices go back down again. So if you're going to accuse people of not understanding something, make sure you've actually thought through what the effects are that you are desperately hoping for. You can troll about a lot of things but to those like myself with an actual degree in economic, your attempts at the subject just come off as sad and pathetic. He was semi right, just over simplified it. If the logistics involved become too excessive, the opportunity cost associated with it (along with the accounting cost associated with it) will push people out. I'm seeing the effects with my indy contacts who seem to have an increased interest in running L4s instead of mining. It's called the supply/demand equilibrium and an increase to costs will cause a shift to the supply curve. The result is a new equilibrium at a higher price level and smaller moving quantity. With many of those previous suppliers moving toward running missions which generate new isk into the game. This will have a multiplier effect on the economies inflation rate as a whole and the player base as a whole is worse off. Now you can dismiss as you which and reply as you like but keep in mind that your reply will be both dismissed and ignored (as in not replied to) on grounds that you quite obviously lack the education and experience on the subject for anything you have to say to hold any weight. Dr Eggnog (Eyjolfur Gudmundsson), former CCP economist and current Rektor (President) of the University of Akureyri would probably disagree. We know he's an economist, we only have your word that you have a degree in economics
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12905
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:23:00 -
[843] - Quote
Studio Ghibli wrote:Hi, I'm a Provi-resident.
I like to mine. I mine with friends. We mine together. I discovered that mining in high-sec is kind of dangerous, though.
This morning, I was mining with friends in Providence. I moved there a few years back.
While I was reading this article, an aggressive pilot was reported in a Brutix one system over. We continued to mine.
The Brutix jumped into our system. We continued to mine.
The Brutix warped to me and my miner-friends, and he webbed and scrammed me--so I webbed and scrammed him back, and all three of us deployed our drones against him, and two stealth bombers decloaked and started nailing him with torpedoes.
And then we continued to mine.
The moral of this story?
If you can't do what you're doing where you are, go somewhere where you can do what you want to do.
No one is forcing you to live up in high-sec. If high-sec is untenable, move somewhere else.
And demanding the game cater to your expectations is silly, especially, when it is no mystery that EVE is a very mean and unforgiving game.
Equipping guns is silly, for sure. So tank your ship, or fly a tankier ship. DSTs--not just for deep space anymore.
In other news, looking for more miners. :)
Provi-Residents, they are better than you. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:23:00 -
[844] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:i'd be happy to defend it and spell out my reasoning to someone that didn't take a page from the republican playbook of deny, obfuscate, propagandize. My first response to you was simply asking for a link to your proof. Why weren't you happy to defend it then? because there is no link to my proof. my proof is more than a decade of marketeering in online games, with an eye focused on markets in the real world to learn how it all works. i know how it works because market laws apply everywhere markets exist. it doesn't matter how you slice it, supply and demand works the same way everywhere and all the time. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5427
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:28:00 -
[845] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:because there is no link to my proof. my proof is more than a decade of marketeering in online games, with an eye focused on markets in the real world to learn how it all works. i know how it works because market laws apply everywhere markets exist. it doesn't matter how you slice it, supply and demand works the same way everywhere and all the time.
If you never posted proof for your claims, why have you repeatedly told people to go back and reread your posts to find proof in them?
Demonfist wrote:why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about, and bow out of a discussion where you've done nothing but say someone is wrong and offer nothing on why or how? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24269
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:29:00 -
[846] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:because there is no link to my proof. So you have none. Good, that was all you had to say.
Quote:my proof is more than a decade of marketeering in online games, with an eye focused on markets in the real world to learn how it all works. i know how it works because market laws apply everywhere markets exist. it doesn't matter how you slice it, supply and demand works the same way everywhere and all the time. Just one problem: none of that proves what he's asking you to prove. I take it you have dug so deep in your attempt at never answering any questions that you've forgotten what it was you had to prove?
Oh, and by the way, what you're alluding to there proves you wrong about the supply/demand-effects of logistics (to say nothing of the logistics-effects of ganking) as well. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

virm pasuul
Mine 'N' Refine Yulai Federation
156
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:31:00 -
[847] - Quote
I'm thinking arguing with someone with such a large ego is a loosing battle. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3855
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:32:00 -
[848] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content.
after two or three years of lying down and doing nothing but weep, the industrial backbone's finally woken to deliver a stern warning. in merely five or so short years, if CODE. hasn't stopped its belligerent yet charming antics, the industrial backbone will strongly begin to consider entertaining the thought of rising up and asking someone else to do their work for them. then CODE.'ll be sorry
you hear me, CODE.? your goose is cooked
BUCKO |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:33:00 -
[849] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:because there is no link to my proof. my proof is more than a decade of marketeering in online games, with an eye focused on markets in the real world to learn how it all works. i know how it works because market laws apply everywhere markets exist. it doesn't matter how you slice it, supply and demand works the same way everywhere and all the time. If you never posted proof for your claims, why have you repeatedly told people to go back and reread your posts to find proof in them? Demonfist wrote:why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about, and bow out of a discussion where you've done nothing but say someone is wrong and offer nothing on why or how? ahh, here we go. let the obfuscation begin. i told people to reread my posts so they would get the point i was making, notice that quote of mine doesn't say anything about proof. i'm reasonably sure i never explicitly stated having a link that would contain all of any "proof" that there was. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5427
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:37:00 -
[850] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:ahh, here we go. let the obfuscation begin. i told people to reread my posts so they would get the point i was making, notice that quote of mine doesn't say anything about proof. i'm reasonably sure i never explicitly stated having a link that would contain all of any "proof" that there was.
So, now you're saying that you have presented no proof to support your claims?
If you know what you're talking about, surely you can defend your claims. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Luukje
The Phoenix Rising
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:37:00 -
[851] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:because there is no link to my proof. my proof is more than a decade of marketeering in online games, with an eye focused on markets in the real world to learn how it all works. i know how it works because market laws apply everywhere markets exist. it doesn't matter how you slice it, supply and demand works the same way everywhere and all the time. If you never posted proof for your claims, why have you repeatedly told people to go back and reread your posts to find proof in them? Demonfist wrote:why don't you scroll back, reread everything i've already typed, accept the fact that i might actually know what i'm talking about, and bow out of a discussion where you've done nothing but say someone is wrong and offer nothing on why or how? ahh, here we go. let the obfuscation begin. i told people to reread my posts so they would get the point i was making, notice that quote of mine doesn't say anything about proof. i'm reasonably sure i never explicitly stated having a link that would contain all of any "proof" that there was.
biggest troll yet. seriously; why you guys bothering replying to someone who must be trolling. surely noone is this delirious he actually believes this crap? |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:39:00 -
[852] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:because there is no link to my proof. So you have none. Good, that was all you had to say. i have no link to it means there is no link, not that there is none.
Tippia wrote:Oh, and by the way, what you're alluding to there proves you wrong about the supply/demand-effects of logistics (to say nothing of the logistics-effects of ganking) as well.
got any numbers for that? oh wait, "ganking is good because ganking is good". i forgot. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5427
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:39:00 -
[853] - Quote
Luukje wrote:biggest troll yet. seriously; why you guys bothering replying to someone who must be trolling. surely noone is this delirious he actually believes this crap?
I see someone's never been on an american liberal arts college campus. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20610
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:39:00 -
[854] - Quote
Luukje wrote:biggest troll yet. seriously; why you guys bothering replying to someone who must be trolling. surely noone is this delirious he actually believes this crap? Boredom 
It's also amusing as hell to see him dig himself into a huge hole that he has absolutely no chance of climbing out of. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12905
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:41:00 -
[855] - Quote
Luukje wrote: biggest troll yet. seriously; why you guys bothering replying to someone who must be trolling. surely noone is this delirious he actually believes this crap?
We learned the hard way that every bad idea, no matter how stupid, must be shot down lest CCP do something bad to the game (the barge rebalance the other year for example) Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
930
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:42:00 -
[856] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock. Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene.
Awesome. So from now on, when I want any ship to be immune to bumping - I simply create a throwaway trial account and log in, shoot my freighter in a free Ibis, and enjoy 60 seconds of being immune to game mechanics.
I can't see anyone abusing that :P |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:43:00 -
[857] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Luukje wrote:biggest troll yet. seriously; why you guys bothering replying to someone who must be trolling. surely noone is this delirious he actually believes this crap? Boredom  It's also amusing as hell to see him dig himself into a huge hole that he has absolutely no chance of climbing out of. why would i want to dig out of it? i'm thinking bunker basement for a summer home. i just need to dig a bit deeper first, then widen it a bit. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:43:00 -
[858] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Demonfist wrote:i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content. after two or three years of lying down and doing nothing but weep, the industrial backbone's finally woken to deliver a stern warning. in merely five or so short years, if CODE. hasn't stopped its belligerent yet charming antics, the industrial backbone will strongly begin to consider entertaining the thought of rising up and asking someone else to do their work for them. then CODE.'ll be sorry you hear me, CODE.? your goose is cooked BUCKO
I bet CODE is scared now after this "stern warning" was given.
But seriously it would be nice for miners and haulers to learn some basic game mechanics and not be easy targets. Blowing up AFK miners and auto piloting haulers is boring. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:44:00 -
[859] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock. Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene. Awesome. So from now on, when I want any ship to be immune to bumping - I simply create a throwaway trial account and log in, shoot my freighter in a free Ibis, and enjoy 60 seconds of being immune to game mechanics. I can't see anyone abusing that :P yes, you would be free to do that. as would other people if they wished to spend the time for something so trivial. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite CODE.
930
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:44:00 -
[860] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec." Copying the same post over and over doesn't make it true. I addressed all of those points. Laws in different jurisdictions are different. New Eden has different laws than the real world, and New Eden's capsuleer police (CONCORD) have an extremely limited, reactionary role which fits the laws of New Eden. If you perform an act of illegal aggression in HS, CONCORD destroys your ship, docks you sec status, and gives you a 15min time out. That is their entire function. Their function has nothing to do with protecting anyone, simply with creating cost for illegal aggression in HS. This is how the game was always intended to work and is how it works now.
This is the problem with Veers, and something that I have not figured out how to work around. You bring up valid points, he simply ignores them and repeats himself. Over and over again. It's depressing.
|

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20613
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:46:00 -
[861] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Luukje wrote:biggest troll yet. seriously; why you guys bothering replying to someone who must be trolling. surely noone is this delirious he actually believes this crap? Boredom  It's also amusing as hell to see him dig himself into a huge hole that he has absolutely no chance of climbing out of. why would i want to dig out of it? i'm thinking bunker basement for a summer home. i just need to dig a bit deeper first, then widen it a bit. Keep on digging then, would you like to borrow a 360 excavator? The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:47:00 -
[862] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:ahh, here we go. let the obfuscation begin. Or, better yet, how about you don't try to obfuscate and instead just either provide the proof you hinted at or admit that it doesn't actually exist?
First, people asked you for proof. Then you said that they could just scroll back to findGǪ somethingGǪ you aren't able to say whatt. Then you said that the proof people were asking for couldn't be linked. Do you even know what it is people are asking you to prove?
Quote:i told people to reread my posts so they would get the point i was making, notice that quote of mine doesn't say anything about proof. So you're now firmly saying that you do not have the proof he was asking for.
Quote:i have no link to it means there is no link, not that there is none. So why can't you provide it if it exists?
Quote:got any numbers for that? Sure. Go back and watch the FF2008 presentation on the effects of not-yet-hulkageddon. Or watch the market history surrounding the isotope interceptions. Or watch the effects of OTEC. As for the benefits of ganking, you already proved those GÇö go back and read your own posts. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:49:00 -
[863] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec." Copying the same post over and over doesn't make it true. I addressed all of those points. Laws in different jurisdictions are different. New Eden has different laws than the real world, and New Eden's capsuleer police (CONCORD) have an extremely limited, reactionary role which fits the laws of New Eden. If you perform an act of illegal aggression in HS, CONCORD destroys your ship, docks you sec status, and gives you a 15min time out. That is their entire function. Their function has nothing to do with protecting anyone, simply with creating cost for illegal aggression in HS. This is how the game was always intended to work and is how it works now. This is the problem with Veers, and something that I have not figured out how to work around. You bring up valid points, he simply ignores them and repeats himself. Over and over again. It's depressing. this is the intarwebz. it's a valid tactic. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Rim Worlds Protectorate
150
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:52:00 -
[864] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree. 
This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:54:00 -
[865] - Quote
IIshira wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Demonfist wrote:i just hope code realizes they're harassing the industrial backbone of the game, stealing isk from the people that mass produce it. it's generally not a good idea to **** off a group that could hire every merc outfit that exists if it had a mind to. but hey, i guess everyone needs content. after two or three years of lying down and doing nothing but weep, the industrial backbone's finally woken to deliver a stern warning. in merely five or so short years, if CODE. hasn't stopped its belligerent yet charming antics, the industrial backbone will strongly begin to consider entertaining the thought of rising up and asking someone else to do their work for them. then CODE.'ll be sorry you hear me, CODE.? your goose is cooked BUCKO I bet CODE is scared now after this "stern warning" was given. But seriously it would be nice for miners and haulers to learn some basic game mechanics and not be easy targets. Blowing up AFK miners and auto piloting haulers is boring. then why do it at all? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20613
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:54:00 -
[866] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Off topic, how many of your ships are named Airwolf?
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:57:00 -
[867] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:then why do it at all? Because if food flies into your mouth, you chew on it even if the process of it getting there isn't as exciting as an all-evening cook-off. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:58:00 -
[868] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:then why do it at all? Because if food flies into your mouth, you chew on it even if the process of it getting there isn't as exciting as an all-evening cook-off. remind me to throw food at you sometime. after adding rat poison.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 18:59:00 -
[869] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Off topic, how many of your ships are named Airwolf? you've got to admit that show had a catchy theme to it Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
273
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:01:00 -
[870] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Any time you undock your ship, regardless of the sec status of the space you are in, you put your ship at risk"
This simple truth is even given to pilots by the starter agents... (not in the direct form of the quote above though, but the message is there nonetheless) so my question is why would anyone forget that?
And where the hell is your head to play one of the most (situation-based) realistic games in the world and forget that there are criminals out there who want to shoot you???
I know I sound like the people who say HTFU, but I'm not trying to portray it that way, I simply am shocked that so many folks are acting as though they should have their hand held in the game...
o/ Celly Smunt
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:02:00 -
[871] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:remind me to throw food at you sometime. after adding rat poison.  So, since your account is hanging a bit loose right now, can I have your stuff.
(No, the lack of a question mark is entirely as intended and conveys the correct meaning.) GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Rim Worlds Protectorate
150
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:03:00 -
[872] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Off topic, how many of your ships are named Airwolf?
almost everyone, the rest are varients based on the ship type ending in wolf :P |

Selene A Eos
Omicron Zeta Unit The Ditanian Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:04:00 -
[873] - Quote
 |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:04:00 -
[874] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:remind me to throw food at you sometime. after adding rat poison.  So, since your account is hanging a bit loose right now, can I have your stuff. (No, the lack of a question mark is entirely as intended and conveys the correct meaning.) i have 13 accounts, and no. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:07:00 -
[875] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:DJentropy Ovaert wrote:This is the problem with Veers, and something that I have not figured out how to work around. You bring up valid points, he simply ignores them and repeats himself. Over and over again. It's depressing.
this is the intarwebz. it's a valid tactic.
Well, at least you're willing to admit that you have no interest in an actual debate or actually defending your claims. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:08:00 -
[876] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i have 13 accounts, and no. So that's a lot of stuff for me then. And again, it wasn't a question GÇö GÇ£noGÇ¥ doesn't really fit.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |
|

CCP Falcon
8713

|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:16:00 -
[877] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled.
Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion.
It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on.
Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden.
Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.
While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode.
The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things.
True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond.
The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top.
EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered.
EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish.
EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers.
Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions.
EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time.
Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced.
That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence.
Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:17:00 -
[878] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i have 13 accounts, and no. So that's a lot of stuff for me then. And again, it wasn't a question GÇö GÇ£noGÇ¥ doesn't really fit. sure it fits. you're welcome to waste time and iskies trying whatever it is you think you can do. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:18:00 -
[879] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:sure it fits. you're welcome to waste time and iskies trying whatever it is you think you can do. Oh, I don't have to do anything GÇö that's the beauty of it: you'll do all the work. Hence why GÇ£noGÇ¥ doesn't really applyGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
273
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:20:00 -
[880] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
NAILED IT AGAIN!!!! Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:22:00 -
[881] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:sure it fits. you're welcome to waste time and iskies trying whatever it is you think you can do. Oh, I don't have to do anything GÇö that's the beauty of it: you'll do all the work. Hence why GÇ£noGÇ¥ doesn't really applyGǪ sounds like more "ganking is good because ganking is good" to me. you have a super awesome day now, k? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3857
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:24:00 -
[882] - Quote
nailed that bullseye in a hole in one. swish swish - touchdown |

Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Rim Worlds Protectorate
151
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:28:00 -
[883] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
<3 you bro. This is just beautiful |

Guttripper
State War Academy Caldari State
528
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:30:00 -
[884] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Too bad, in my opinion, CCP has been on track for quite some time to cater more towards the lowest common denominator instead of following their habits of old and being "risk takers". Instead of CCP giving more options and variety of gaming while asking their player base what they would want to do next, CCP has become more, "we know what is best for you and you will accept what we dish out without question".
Perhaps that is the challenge - how to accept without question. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:31:00 -
[885] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:sounds like more "ganking is good because ganking is good" to me. You mean it sounds like you're not quite sure what's being said because you failed once again to pay attention? Yes, it's a lot like that.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:37:00 -
[886] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:sounds like more "ganking is good because ganking is good" to me. You mean it sounds like you're not quite sure what's being said because you failed once again to pay attention? Yes, it's a lot like that. sorry, did you say something? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Natural CloneKiller
Ukranian Hauling Co.
37
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:37:00 -
[887] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
This in the main is why I play this immersive game. Its also the reason we shot that OP guy in the first place. I recall learning the game for the first time. I asked my new CEO at the time to test the tank on a raptor I could fly and he killed me in 4 hits by accident - so I left as a noob. The next corp I joined invited me in...told me to come mining with them and proceeded to kill me in a belt - then kicked me out of corp saying go play WOW. All I wanted from that moment was revenge and so was born a pvp career. The raw emotion and the fact we can and do lose so much is what draws me back to the game. Yes we all don't want to be on the receiving end, but its what draws many of us into this world.
I had to laugh the other day - we ganked a guy we had hunted for ages and a few weeks later we got talking in eve. Turned out he lived 10 miles from me in RL so we went for a curry! You don't get that in WOW! And he came on a pvp op and loved it!
I could not agree more with the fact we need to focus on continuing to bring in new players, because lets face it, the majority of the community want to keep doing this for years to come.
FALCON - I think a few people might want to buy you a drink at the next fanfest!
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24270
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:41:00 -
[888] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:sorry, did you say something? Yes: do you understand why the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and why ganking is good for the economy yet? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:44:00 -
[889] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:sorry, did you say something? Yes: do you understand why the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and why ganking is good for the economy yet? didn't catch that. try all caps or something. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Lord Jasta
Happy Fun times
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:45:00 -
[890] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back. 
I would like to officially offer my services as an escort. This can be done for a varying fee and in your corp or out of it. Feel free to contact me for info.
|

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3857
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:45:00 -
[891] - Quote
Natural CloneKiller wrote:This in the main is why I play this immersive game. Its also the reason we shot that OP guy in the first place. I recall learning the game for the first time. I asked my new CEO at the time to test the tank on a raptor I could fly and he killed me in 4 hits by accident - so I left as a noob. The next corp I joined invited me in...told me to come mining with them and proceeded to kill me in a belt - then kicked me out of corp saying go play WOW. All I wanted from that moment was revenge and so was born a pvp career.
this is basically the first part of a supervillain origin story |

Indahmawar Fazmarai
2799
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:49:00 -
[892] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
Yay, but don't ask to make it harsh and fearful for gankers. They whine quite annoyingly afterwards.  The Greater Fool Bar-áis now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden!-áIngame chat channel: The Greater Fool Bar |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24272
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:51:00 -
[893] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:didn't catch that. try all caps or something. Do you understand why the scenario you describe is unprofitable, and why ganking is good for the economy yet? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
93
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:52:00 -
[894] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice? So? That's not a prerequisite for forming a fleet for your own protection. having people willing to join is.
The way you carry yourself on the forums is an indicator to the way you behave in game. I can see why you have no one willing to join you... |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 19:57:00 -
[895] - Quote
Cancel Align NOW wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:because not every player of eve is a member of a 20,000 member alliance that can pull support out of it's rectum at a moments notice? So? That's not a prerequisite for forming a fleet for your own protection. having people willing to join is. The way you carry yourself on the forums is an indicator to the way you behave in game. I can see why you have no one willing to join you... ...I can also see why people would be willing to run at a loss to gank you... i'm worse in the game, and the last person that ganked me actually got me a free ship. i am my own support and my own backup, not everyone has the tools available that i do. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3860
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:00:00 -
[896] - Quote
he's a one-man wolfpack |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:01:00 -
[897] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:sure it fits. you're welcome to waste time and iskies trying whatever it is you think you can do. Oh, I don't have to do anything GÇö that's the beauty of it: you'll do all the work. Hence why GÇ£noGÇ¥ doesn't really applyGǪ sounds like more "ganking is good because ganking is good" to me. you have a super awesome day now, k?
I really hate to spoil surprises, but guessing games get tiring when the guesser is bad at them.
What it sounds like is that you haven't read the EULA or TOS, or you'd understand why you may have put your account(s) in a tenuous spot. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:06:00 -
[898] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:sure it fits. you're welcome to waste time and iskies trying whatever it is you think you can do. Oh, I don't have to do anything GÇö that's the beauty of it: you'll do all the work. Hence why GÇ£noGÇ¥ doesn't really applyGǪ sounds like more "ganking is good because ganking is good" to me. you have a super awesome day now, k? I really hate to spoil surprises, but guessing games get tiring when the guesser is bad at them. What it sounds like is that you haven't read the EULA or TOS, or you'd understand why you may have put your account(s) in a tenuous spot. there won't be a surprise. i've read the eula and tos. my accounts are just fine. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:09:00 -
[899] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:he's a one-man wolfpack
5 billion in losses in a year is impressive in its own way.
Gotta love the double tanked active/buffer cyclone though. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:12:00 -
[900] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:he's a one-man wolfpack 5 billion in losses in a year is impressive in its own way. Gotta love the double tanked active/buffer cyclone though. a year? closer to three months i'd think. my memory of events may be somewhat off. drop in the bucket though. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24274
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:15:00 -
[901] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:What it sounds like is that you haven't read the EULA or TOS, or you'd understand why you may have put your account(s) in a tenuous spot. there won't be a surprise. i've read the eula and tos. So you understand why your accounts might be at risk then.
By the way, you didn't answer the question. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:18:00 -
[902] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:What it sounds like is that you haven't read the EULA or TOS, or you'd understand why you may have put your account(s) in a tenuous spot. there won't be a surprise. i've read the eula and tos. So you understand why your accounts might be at risk then. By the way, you didn't answer the question. i understand that the goal of trolls is to agitate others into doing what they want, which is often accompanied by turning around and misinterpreting them for their own purposes. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:21:00 -
[903] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Actually, pretty much anyone (and everyone) does. That's kind of the point being made here.
There are some tools he could be using that other players don't have access to. But that goes back into the realm of EULA problems.  "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4485
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:23:00 -
[904] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience. o7 =][= |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:24:00 -
[905] - Quote
I'm still wondering, if Eve isn't supposed to be safe, why are the consequences for ganking so predictable? I just think we should shake things up a bit. A bit more RNG to the concord spawn timer and amount. instead of a predictable 17 or whatever seconds, and luring concord off, give concord the ability to be a bit less predictable. Add some *actual* risks to the gank, and potentially harsher penalties (being prevented from using gates for a period of time perhaps, forcing gankers to make use of bridges into lowsec or something.
I'm not upset with the current system, I just think we have some untapped potential to make it a bit less predictable and reball the risk/reward factor a bit. Not a forum alt.-á |

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4485
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:25:00 -
[906] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:What it sounds like is that you haven't read the EULA or TOS, or you'd understand why you may have put your account(s) in a tenuous spot. there won't be a surprise. i've read the eula and tos. So you understand why your accounts might be at risk then. By the way, you didn't answer the question. i understand that the goal of trolls is to agitate others into doing what they want, which is often accompanied by turning around and misinterpreting them for their own purposes. No that's being manipulated, being trolled has only tears as a desired outcome. =][= |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:29:00 -
[907] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:Actually, pretty much anyone (and everyone) does. That's kind of the point being made here. There are some tools he could be using that other players don't have access to. But that goes back into the realm of EULA problems.  i'm pretty sure isboxer use has been cleared. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Maichin Civire
Sinister Spinster Advent of Fate
79
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:30:00 -
[908] - Quote
Forty-six pages in four days.
I guess it's new record of EVE-O forums? http://quietrebelwriting.blogspot.com/
- my little blog about one of the worst blogs about EVE Online. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3862
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:32:00 -
[909] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:I'm still wondering, if Eve isn't supposed to be safe, why are the consequences for ganking so predictable? I just think we should shake things up a bit. A bit more RNG to the concord spawn timer and amount. instead of a predictable 17 or whatever seconds, and luring concord off, give concord the ability to be a bit less predictable. Add some *actual* risks to the gank, and potentially harsher penalties (being prevented from using gates for a period of time perhaps, forcing gankers to make use of bridges into lowsec or something.
I'm not upset with the current system, I just think we have some untapped potential to make it a bit less predictable and reball the risk/reward factor a bit. there's already risk in an rng in the form of loot drops we don't need that garbage twice
or three times if you inlclude the rng in tracking
the gankers are already -forced- to remain in their pods or get shot for fifteen minutes and -forced- to be chased by faction police everywhere if they don't waste a huge amount of time or isk getting their sec back up again
finally making gankers use bridges (how do you bridge into or out of highsec?) to go into lowsec doesn't make sense seeing as they're obviously highsec players since they're playing in highsec. this is like forcing highsec level four runners into lowsec level fours? |

Studio Ghibli
Starstuff Industrial Rim Worlds Protectorate
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:32:00 -
[910] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Studio Ghibli wrote:Hi, I'm a Provi-resident.
I like to mine. I mine with friends. We mine together. I discovered that mining in high-sec is kind of dangerous, though.
This morning, I was mining with friends in Providence. I moved there a few years back.
While I was reading this article, an aggressive pilot was reported in a Brutix one system over. We continued to mine.
The Brutix jumped into our system. We continued to mine.
The Brutix warped to me and my miner-friends, and he webbed and scrammed me--so I webbed and scrammed him back, and all three of us deployed our drones against him, and two stealth bombers decloaked and started nailing him with torpedoes.
And then we continued to mine.
The moral of this story?
If you can't do what you're doing where you are, go somewhere where you can do what you want to do.
No one is forcing you to live up in high-sec. If high-sec is untenable, move somewhere else.
And demanding the game cater to your expectations is silly, especially, when it is no mystery that EVE is a very mean and unforgiving game.
Equipping guns is silly, for sure. So tank your ship, or fly a tankier ship. DSTs--not just for deep space anymore.
In other news, looking for more miners. :) Provi-Residents, they are better than you.
I laughed at this back-handed compliment. ;)
|

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:33:00 -
[911] - Quote
Maichin Civire wrote:Forty-six pages in four days.
I guess it's new record of EVE-O forums? atleast 7 pages of it is "ganking is good because ganking is good". someone is incapable of thinking of anything else it seems. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:39:00 -
[912] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:Actually, pretty much anyone (and everyone) does. That's kind of the point being made here. There are some tools he could be using that other players don't have access to. But that goes back into the realm of EULA problems.  i'm pretty sure isboxer use has been cleared.
It has (kind of). Of course, that means that everyone has access to that same tool, so it clearly can't be what you were referring to when you said "not everyone has the tools available that i do." "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:40:00 -
[913] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Lilliana Stelles wrote:I'm still wondering, if Eve isn't supposed to be safe, why are the consequences for ganking so predictable? I just think we should shake things up a bit. A bit more RNG to the concord spawn timer and amount. instead of a predictable 17 or whatever seconds, and luring concord off, give concord the ability to be a bit less predictable. Add some *actual* risks to the gank, and potentially harsher penalties (being prevented from using gates for a period of time perhaps, forcing gankers to make use of bridges into lowsec or something.
I'm not upset with the current system, I just think we have some untapped potential to make it a bit less predictable and reball the risk/reward factor a bit. there's already risk in an rng in the form of loot drops we don't need that garbage twice or three times if you inlclude the rng in tracking the gankers are already -forced- to remain in their pods or get shot for fifteen minutes and -forced- to be chased by faction police everywhere if they don't waste a huge amount of time or isk getting their sec back up again finally making gankers use bridges (how do you bridge into or out of highsec?) to go into lowsec doesn't make sense seeing as they're obviously highsec players since they're playing in highsec. this is like forcing highsec level four runners into lowsec level fours?
You're getting the point of this, you're just not thinking about it. When you run missions constantly for a corp (say, SOE out of Omson for example), you're eventually forced to take a lowsec mission or wait for a 4 hour cooldown, or take a standing hit. The game already forces mission runners to either take a time-out, or go into lowsec. Why not do the same thing to gankers? Force them to get stuck in a system for 4 hours or bridge out to lowsec and do something else if they want to continue playing? The same thing for highsec explorer who get lowsec escalations. No one should have zero-risk gameplay.
The current problem (if there is a problem, I'm still not entirely sure about that, but with all the whining I may as well propose a solution), is that the RISK involved is not proportional to the crime. Basically the risk is negligible, loot drops aside, because entities like CODE gank regardless of profit (as they have the right to), so the RNG involved in potential loot drops is IRRELEVANT when you're not aiming to get any loot. Therefore, there needs to be a new type of RNG-based penalty for ganking, such as a fine for 10% of the damage caused split among everyone involved on the kill, with a slight random factor, or an inability to travel for a RNG based time period.
Gankers wouldn't like it, but it would add *risk* to ganking. Complete predictability has no risk. (I will lose my ship and get a kill, guaranteed) is not risk. And it has come down to an exact science where you can guarantee to get a kill if you have enough DPS, due to the predictable response time of concord. This is a problem.
At the very least, maybe concord needs some variety (potential for cloaked concord ships waiting on gates, concord checkpoints, concord logi-based response teams to potentially rep ships under attack, or something such as that).
I don't want highsec to be safe. I just feel like this is starting to get boring. It's been the same complaints now for a few years, and it's much more of an issue than it used to be as gankers have clearly just become comfortable with the static-ness of concord response and punishment. It needs to be changed and shaken up, just like SOV and capitals and every other aspect of the game. Not a forum alt.-á |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:41:00 -
[914] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Tippia wrote:Actually, pretty much anyone (and everyone) does. That's kind of the point being made here. There are some tools he could be using that other players don't have access to. But that goes back into the realm of EULA problems.  i'm pretty sure isboxer use has been cleared. It has ( kind of). Of course, that means that everyone has access to that same tool, so it clearly can't be what you were referring to when you said "not everyone has the tools available that i do." you have and use isboxer too, then? :] Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24276
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:42:00 -
[915] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i understand that the goal of trolls is to agitate others into doing what they want, which is often accompanied by turning around and misinterpreting them for their own purposes. That's very good and all, but doesn't actually relate to anything you quoted. So, again: you understand why your accounts might be at risk then? And you didn't answer the question.
Demonfist wrote:atleast 7 pages of it is "ganking is good because ganking is good". someone is incapable of thinking of anything else it seems. So stop thinking about it, then. The only one repeating that nonsensical phrase is you. vOv
RubyPorto wrote:There are some tools he could be using that other players don't have access to. But that goes back into the realm of EULA problems.  That's a fair point, but then again, other players would technically have access to such tools as well GÇö they're just clever enough to choose not to go down that road.
Lilliana Stelles wrote:I'm still wondering, if Eve isn't supposed to be safe, why are the consequences for ganking so predictable? Because one has little to do with the other. The result of doing a reverse two-and-a-half somersault into lava is pretty predictable, and still isn't safe in the least.
There are plenty of actual risks to the gank GÇö the RNG is involved almost from the get-go, and even without it, there's the inherent unpredictability of player behaviour.
Quote:The current problem (if there is a problem, I'm still not entirely sure about that, but with all the whining I may as well propose a solution), is that the RISK involved is not proportional to the crime. Basically the risk is negligible, loot drops aside, because entities like CODE gank regardless of profit (as they have the right to), so the RNG involved in potential loot drops is IRRELEVANT when you're not aiming to get any loot. That's not really a sensible way of approaching it. GÇ£If we ignore these risks, there are almost no risksGÇ¥. By the same token, you might as well say GÇ£if we ignore these rewards, there are no rewardsGÇ¥ and conclude that ganking needs to see some rather significant buffs in that department.  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Generic Marketting Character
Super Capital Proliferation Ltd
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:45:00 -
[916] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
You're already from the north of england which means I'm required to love you But now I want your man babies, I'm not certain how we'll do it, but we'll make it work, we have to |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:46:00 -
[917] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you have and use isboxer too, then? :]
Having a tool available and using it are different things. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24276
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:46:00 -
[918] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:It has ( kind of). Of course, that means that everyone has access to that same tool, so it clearly can't be what you were referring to when you said "not everyone has the tools available that i do." you have and use isboxer too, then? :] What does that have to do with anything? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders
1906
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:47:00 -
[919] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:I'm still wondering, if Eve isn't supposed to be safe, why are the consequences for ganking so predictable? I just think we should shake things up a bit. A bit more RNG to the concord spawn timer and amount. instead of a predictable 17 or whatever seconds, and luring concord off, give concord the ability to be a bit less predictable. Add some *actual* risks to the gank, and potentially harsher penalties (being prevented from using gates for a period of time perhaps, forcing gankers to make use of blops bridges into lowsec or something.) Perhaps isk fines that are actual proportional to the damage done instead of proportional to the attacker's ship value.
I'm not upset with the current system, I just think we have some untapped potential to make it a bit less predictable and reball the risk/reward factor a bit. You're looking at it upside down.
CONCORD mechanics are balanced from the VICTIM's point of view, not the gankers'.
Though they're two faces of the same coin, what's important here is how risky it is to fly loot pinatas / afk / unescorted / unscouted. What happens to the gankers is irrelevant, what really matters is how risky it is to fly valuable stuff in highsec.
Because that's what defines the game and its economy.
Gankers could almost be randomly spawning NPCs. They're ccp workers, in a sense (not literally, to my knowledge at least ). Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter! |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:50:00 -
[920] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:It has ( kind of). Of course, that means that everyone has access to that same tool, so it clearly can't be what you were referring to when you said "not everyone has the tools available that i do." you have and use isboxer too, then? :] What does that have to do with anything? shoo, troll. grown ups are talking. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:50:00 -
[921] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Gankers could almost be randomly spawning NPCs. They're ccp workers, in a sense (not literally, to my knowledge at least  ). WeeeellGǪ they hired CCP Falcon here, after all. 
Demonfist wrote:shoo, troll. grown ups are talking. So, being an adult, you understand that what you said has nothing to do with what he said? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3864
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:50:00 -
[922] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:You're getting the point of this, you're just not thinking about it. When you run missions constantly for a corp (say, SOE out of Omson for example), you're eventually forced to take a lowsec mission or wait for a 4 hour cooldown, or take a standing hit. The game already forces mission runners to either take a time-out, or go into lowsec. or take the negligible standing hit as most of us'd do. it's not like career mission runners are short on good standing. and you don't have to 'wait' the cooldown, you run missions in the meantime
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Why not do the same thing to gankers? Force them to get stuck in a system for 4 hours or bridge out to lowsec and do something else if they want to continue playing? The same thing for highsec explorer who get lowsec escalations. No one should have zero-risk gameplay. uh, no, the question is 'why should anyone have to put up with that garbage'. and gankers don't have zero-risk gameplay.
Lilliana Stelles wrote:The current problem (if there is a problem, I'm still not entirely sure about that, but with all the whining I may as well propose a solution), is that the RISK involved is not proportional to the crime. Basically the risk is negligible, loot drops aside, because entities like CODE gank regardless of profit (as they have the right to), so the RNG involved in potential loot drops is IRRELEVANT when you're not aiming to get any loot. Therefore, there needs to be a new type of RNG-based penalty for ganking, such as a fine for 10% of the damage caused split among everyone involved on the kill, with a slight random factor, or an inability to travel for a RNG based time period. any risk involved past mechanical is meta, provided by the players. since ganking is meta anyway this is entirely suitable. there doesn't need to be any more mechanical risk to compensate for the lack of meta risk the targets should be providing if they intend to stay unexploded.
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Complete predictability has no risk. (I will lose my ship and get a kill, guaranteed) is not risk. losing your ship guaranteed is a risk. a one-hundred-percent-chance risk. and the system, accounting for meta, is not predictable unless you make it. i suggest turning off autopilot for a start. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:52:00 -
[923] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:you have and use isboxer too, then? :] Having a tool available and using it are different things. i'll take this to mean that you don't have or use it. so "not everyone has the tools i do" is perfectly accurate. pay the fee and you can be awesome too.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:54:00 -
[924] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i'll take this to mean that you don't have or use it. so "not everyone has the tools i do" is perfectly accurate. But that is not what you said. What you actually said is entirely inaccurate (wellGǪ at least presuming you're not breaking the EULA in new and interesting ways). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:54:00 -
[925] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Because one has little to do with the other. The result of doing a reverse two-and-a-half somersault into lava is pretty predictable, and still isn't safe in the least.
There are plenty of actual risks to the gank GÇö the RNG is involved almost from the get-go, and even without it, there's the inherent unpredictability of player behaviour.
Is there? I'd like to know what percentage of ganks actually fail. I assume it's somewhat similar to the percentage of players who die to mission rats... probably pretty low. But I could be completely wrong on that, and it definitely warrants some more research.
Quote:That's not really a sensible way of approaching it. GÇ£If we ignore these risks, there are almost no risksGÇ¥. By the same token, you might as well say GÇ£if we ignore these rewards, there are no rewardsGÇ¥ and conclude that ganking needs to see some rather significant buffs in that department. 
Interesting idea actually. I don't see many people getting behind the idea of increased rewards for gankers, but it's not an unreasonable request. From where I'm sitting, it *appears to me* that the rewards currently outweigh the risks, and that it needs to be shaken up some. I'm not claiming to be an expert though. I've never ganked anyone outside of suspect/limited engagements, and I haven't really been ganked either.
Overall, it just seems to be a really static part of the game for the last few years that seems to frustrate quite a few players, so I think it needs some sort of attention. Not a forum alt.-á |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:57:00 -
[926] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i'll take this to mean that you don't have or use it. so "not everyone has the tools i do" is perfectly accurate. But that is not what you said. What you actually said is entirely inaccurate (wellGǪ at least presuming you're not breaking the EULA in new and interesting ways). that's nice. go hide under your bridge. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:58:00 -
[927] - Quote
Gotta run for an hour or so and I don't really have time to address this, but I'd like to point out:
I think you're confused on the difference between risk and cost.
From the dictionary.
Risk: the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen (this doesn't apply to suicide ganking as the consequence is guaranteed). Cost: something that is lost, damaged, or given up in order to achieve or get something Not a forum alt.-á |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:58:00 -
[928] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:you have and use isboxer too, then? :] Having a tool available and using it are different things. i'll take this to mean that you don't have or use it. so "not everyone has the tools i do" is perfectly accurate. pay the fee and you can be awesome too. 
I have no need for it. Doesn't mean it's not available to me, like it is to every other player in EVE.
And while "not everyone has [and uses] the tools i do" may be accurate, that's not what you said. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

virm pasuul
Mine 'N' Refine Yulai Federation
158
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 20:59:00 -
[929] - Quote
If you want to bring the RNG into ganks, how about concord only turn up 90% of the time, the other 10% they are at the doughnut shop and don't bother. There you go RNG in ganks. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:00:00 -
[930] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:that's nice. So you understand, then, why what you said was incorrect? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:01:00 -
[931] - Quote
virm pasuul wrote:If you want to bring the RNG into ganks, how about concord only turn up 90% of the time, the other 10% they are at the doughnut shop and don't bother. There you go RNG in ganks.
Honestly that's *not* a bad idea.
Better yet, make it reflective of the sec status of the system. Not a forum alt.-á |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:01:00 -
[932] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Interesting idea actually. I don't see many people getting behind the idea of increased rewards for gankers, but it's not an unreasonable request. From where I'm sitting, it *appears to me* that the rewards currently outweigh the risks, and that it needs to be shaken up some. I'm not claiming to be an expert though. I've never ganked anyone outside of suspect/limited engagements, and I haven't really been ganked either.
Overall, it just seems to be a really static part of the game for the last few years that seems to frustrate quite a few players, so I think it needs some sort of attention.
The game provides precisely zero rewards to gankers. The rewards for ganking are entirely player created.
It only frustrates players who haven't read the New Pilot FAQ that CCP has published. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:01:00 -
[933] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:you have and use isboxer too, then? :] Having a tool available and using it are different things. i'll take this to mean that you don't have or use it. so "not everyone has the tools i do" is perfectly accurate. pay the fee and you can be awesome too.  I have no need for it. Doesn't mean it's not available to me, like it is to every other player in EVE. And while "not everyone has [and uses] the tools i do" may be accurate, that's not what you said. you're going to start picking nits too? you didn't pay the fee, so you don't have access to it. most other eve players also didn't and don't. i did, so i do. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders
1906
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:02:00 -
[934] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Gotta run for an hour or so and I don't really have time to address this, but I'd like to point out: I think you're confused on the difference between risk and cost. From the dictionary. Risk: the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen (this doesn't apply to suicide ganking as the consequence is guaranteed). Cost: something that is lost, damaged, or given up in order to achieve or get something The real risk for highsec gankers is that people finally learn to fly their internet spaceships. Like Red Frog, that has less than 0.1% losses.
I'll admit that it's quite a low risk given the current incompetence level, but that's not ccp's fault, is it? Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter! |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:02:00 -
[935] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:that's nice. So you understand, then, why what you said was incorrect? so you understand you are a troll? Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5428
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:04:00 -
[936] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:I'll admit that it's quite a low risk given the current incompetence level, but that's not ccp's fault, is it?
That's before you take into account shipments of PyrE, of course. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5429
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:07:00 -
[937] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you're going to start picking nits too? you didn't pay the fee, so you don't have access to it. most other eve players also didn't and don't. i did, so i do.
Yep, I haven't bought a chainsaw, so there's nothing available to me to cut down the tree.
Ready to stray back on topic? How is your gank scenario profitable to the ganker? "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3864
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:08:00 -
[938] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Gotta run for an hour or so and I don't really have time to address this, but I'd like to point out: I think you're confused on the difference between risk and cost. From the dictionary. Risk: the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen (this doesn't apply to suicide ganking as the consequence is guaranteed). Cost: something that is lost, damaged, or given up in order to achieve or get something maybe the dictionary of farts says suicide ganking is an exception (it totally doesn't i wrote that book with my butt) but it's not
risk is a combination of the chance of something happening and the value or importance of what's at risk
also suicide ganking still doesn't have a one-hundred percent chance of success so it's still a risk even by that fetid definition |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:09:00 -
[939] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're going to start picking nits too? you didn't pay the fee, so you don't have access to it. most other eve players also didn't and don't. i did, so i do. Yep, I haven't bought a chainsaw, so there's nothing available to me to cut down the tree. Ready to stray back on topic? How is your gank scenario profitable to the ganker? because good trolls are good trolls  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:09:00 -
[940] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:so you understand you are a troll? So you understand, then, why what you said was incorrect?'
Calling me a troll when you have no cogent or coherent answer doesn't make me one GÇö your 100% success rate at being wrong and being in every way utterly and completely incapable of answering a question is a far greater indicator of a troll than my asking you very simple questions to make sure you understood what you just said. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:10:00 -
[941] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Is there? I'd like to know what percentage of ganks actually fail. I assume it's somewhat similar to the percentage of players who die to mission rats... probably pretty low. But I could be completely wrong on that, and it definitely warrants some more research. The number of failed ganks doesn't tell you much of any use about the risks GÇö they would at most tell you how many times people didn't properly judge, chose, and/or compensated those risks.
The risks themselves are hardly a mystery. There's the (random) hit mechanics; the (random) loot fairy; the chance that he's sporting implants you haven't accounted for; the chance that he's sporting fleet bonuses you haven't accounted for; the chance that he has support of one of a dozen different types; the chance that someone steals GÇ£yourGÇ¥ loot; the chance that your looter explodes (yay CrimeWatch 2.0); the chance that you just happen to explode before you get a shot off (because you're a ganker GÇö aka a free target). Hell, there's the chance that he simply fails to show up for any number of reasons.
And yes, even the inevitable ship loss itself is a risk. Just because it's pretty much a certainty does not mean it's not a probability of a loss that you have to compensate for GÇö risks don't stop being risks just because the probability is 1. If you think they do, then an excellent way of increasing the risk in ganking is to only have a 1% chance of CONCORD appearingGǪ 
Quote:Overall, it just seems to be a really static part of the game for the last few years that seems to frustrate quite a few players, so I think it needs some sort of attention. It's become a bit stale, yes, because the means and methods available to gankers have been slowly eroded away over the years to the point where only a small handful of strategies and an even smaller selection of targets are worth-while any more. There's very little room for surprise and experimentation any more. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3864
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:11:00 -
[942] - Quote
actually come to think of it a scratch'n'sniff dictionary is the best idea ever
brb gonna get rich |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:11:00 -
[943] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:so you understand you are a troll? So you understand, then, why what you said was incorrect?' Calling me a troll when you have no cogent or coherent answer doesn't make me one GÇö your 100% success rate at being wrong and being in every way utterly and completely incapable of answering a question is a far greater indicator of a troll than my asking you very simple questions to make sure you understood what you just said. so you do understand you're a troll then? excellent. we're making progress. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:14:00 -
[944] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:so you do understand you're a troll then? excellent. we're making progress. Nonsensical strawman, non sequitur, and GÇ£tu quoqueGÇ¥ fallacy.
Now, answer the question: do you understand why what you said was incorrect? Yes or no. It's a very simple question. If you can't answer it, we know the answer. If you refuse to answer it, we know the answer. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:15:00 -
[945] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:so you do understand you're a troll then? excellent. we're making progress. Nonsensical strawman and GÇ£tu quoqueGÇ¥ fallacy. Now, answer the question: do you understand why what you said was incorrect? Yes or no. It's a very simple question. If you can't answer it, we know the answer. If you refuse to answer it, we know the answer. my answer is this: you're a troll. have a nice day.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:17:00 -
[946] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:my answer is this: So that's a GÇ£noGÇ¥ then. You are wilfully admitting that you do not understand the difference between availability, ownership, and use.
Do you wish to alter your answer? Again, a simple yes or no will do, and again if you can't or refuse to answer, we will know the answer.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:18:00 -
[947] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:my answer is this: So that's a GÇ£noGÇ¥ then. You are wilfully admitting that you do not understand the difference between availability, ownership, and use. Do you wish to alter your answer? Again, a simple yes or no will do, and again if you can't or refuse to answer, we will know the answer. you're a troll and a ganker. an all around useless festering boil on the rump of eve. have a nice day.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:21:00 -
[948] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you're a troll and a ganker. an all around useless festering boil on the rump of eve. So that's also a GÇ£noGÇ¥ then.
Ok. By your own admission, we have now established that you are not familiar with the difference between these words, just like you are not familiar with the concept of profit, just like you are not familiar with how the EVE economy operates, just like how you are completely in the dark about what people do in this game.
None of these areas of ignorance on your part makes me a troll. They just make you completely incapable of and unqualified for discussing most matters related to the game. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:23:00 -
[949] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:you're a troll and a ganker. an all around useless festering boil on the rump of eve. So that's also a GÇ£noGÇ¥ then. Ok. By your own admission, we have now established that you are not familiar with the difference between these words, just like you are not familiar with the concept of profit, just like you are not familiar with how the EVE economy operates, just like how you are completely in the dark about what people do in this game. None of these areas of ignorance on your part makes me a troll. They just make you completely incapable and unqualified from discussing most matters related to the game. i sure am glad i can pay my isk bills without having to randomly kill people who did nothing to me in fights designed to completely lack any challenge and require zero pvp ability. have a nice day, troll.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24277
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:24:00 -
[950] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:i sure am glad i can pay my isk bills without having to randomly kill people who did nothing to me in fights designed to completely lack any challenge and require zero pvp ability. Ok. What does that have to do with any of what you quoted?
Are you trying to say that you want to branch out, but that your unfamiliarity with the game is limiting your options? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:26:00 -
[951] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i sure am glad i can pay my isk bills without having to randomly kill people who did nothing to me in fights designed to completely lack any challenge and require zero pvp ability. blahblahblahblah blah blah blahblah blah i'm just a troll!  trollin trollin trollin, keep these fools a'trollin. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24278
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:28:00 -
[952] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:trollin trollin trollin, keep these fools a'trollin. You can keep trolling if you like, or you can answer the question: what does what you wrote have to do with any of what you quoted? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:29:00 -
[953] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i sure am glad i can pay my isk bills without having to randomly kill people who did nothing to me in fights designed to completely lack any challenge and require zero pvp ability. blahblahblahblah blah blah blahblah blah i'm just a troll!  trollin trollin trollin, keep these fools a'trollin.
I hope you're trolling... It's better than the alternative that you actually believe what you're typing. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:30:00 -
[954] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:trollin trollin trollin, keep these fools a'trollin. blahblah blah blah blah blahblahblah more troll stuff 
Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3864
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:31:00 -
[955] - Quote
it's like the gotta-have-the-last-word four hundred metres at the ancient and revered event the dumbarse olympics up in here
if the event runs any more overtime i'll have to move the unfunny-comment relay to the overpriced-architectural-horseshit stadium in features and ideas
or i would have to if i wasn't the only participant in the event |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:31:00 -
[956] - Quote
IIshira wrote:Demonfist wrote:Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:i sure am glad i can pay my isk bills without having to randomly kill people who did nothing to me in fights designed to completely lack any challenge and require zero pvp ability. blahblahblahblah blah blah blahblah blah i'm just a troll!  trollin trollin trollin, keep these fools a'trollin. I hope you're trolling... It's better than the alternative that you actually believe what you're typing. i'm not. he is. or she, or wtf ever it is. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:32:00 -
[957] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:it's like the gotta-have-the-last-word four hundred metres at the ancient and revered event the dumbarse olympics up in here
if the event runs any more overtime i'll have to move the unfunny-comment relay to the overpriced-architectural-horseshit stadium in features and ideas
or i would have to if i wasn't the only participant in the event yeah, i was kinda hoping there'd be more isboxer discussion so we'd get threadlocked. Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3864
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:33:00 -
[958] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:it's like the gotta-have-the-last-word four hundred metres at the ancient and revered event the dumbarse olympics up in here
if the event runs any more overtime i'll have to move the unfunny-comment relay to the overpriced-architectural-horseshit stadium in features and ideas
or i would have to if i wasn't the only participant in the event yeah, i was kinda hoping there'd be more isboxer discussion so we'd get threadlocked. that's lovely but it's best you stop posting |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:37:00 -
[959] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Demonfist wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:it's like the gotta-have-the-last-word four hundred metres at the ancient and revered event the dumbarse olympics up in here
if the event runs any more overtime i'll have to move the unfunny-comment relay to the overpriced-architectural-horseshit stadium in features and ideas
or i would have to if i wasn't the only participant in the event yeah, i was kinda hoping there'd be more isboxer discussion so we'd get threadlocked. that's lovely but it's best you stop posting that probably is a good idea. i think homeskillet is finally realizing they really should have stopped when i suggested it to not waste time. then again, they play eve, so obviously no life and probably nothing better to do. with that said, dragoncon here i come!  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24278
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:39:00 -
[960] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:IIshira wrote:I hope you're trolling... It's better than the alternative that you actually believe what you're typing. i'm not. he is. or she, or wtf ever it is. No. I'm simply asking you a question: what does what you wrote have to do with any of what you quoted? It sounded like you were trying to say something of relevance, but it was so unconnected from the context in which it appeared that it did not make any sense or offered any kind of sensible argumentation. So if you were, please explain what it was GÇö present your argument.
Otherwise, if all you want is for us to add the difference between trolling and asking questions to the rapidly expanding list of things you are not familiar with, then just say so. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:40:00 -
[961] - Quote
So what does everyone think about the prices of White Glaze going down so much? I'm sure gankers have something to do with this as well. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11132
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:40:00 -
[962] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:my position is entirely untenable so i'm just going to accuse everyone else of trolling
Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:40:00 -
[963] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:IIshira wrote:I hope you're trolling... It's better than the alternative that you actually believe what you're typing. i'm not. he is. or she, or wtf ever it is. No. I'm simply asking you a question: what does what you wrote have to do with any of what you quoted? It sounded like you were trying to say something of relevance, but it was so unconnected from the context in which it appeared that it did not make any sense or offered any kind of sensible argumentation. So if you were, please explain what it was GÇö present your argument. Otherwise, if all you want is for us to add the difference between trolling and asking questions to the rapidly expanding list of things you are not familiar with, then just say so. *pats on the head as he's walking out the door*  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:41:00 -
[964] - Quote
Andski wrote:Demonfist wrote:my position is entirely untenable so i'm just going to accuse everyone else of trolling
Ugh you just made me like another Goon post... Please stop  |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:41:00 -
[965] - Quote
Andski wrote:Demonfist wrote:my position is entirely untenable so i'm just going to accuse everyone else of trolling dude! it's like you know me.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24278
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:43:00 -
[966] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:*pats on the head as he's walking out the door*  That's nice. How about, instead, you answer the question: what does what you wrote have to do with any of what you quoted? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Demonfist
Inner Ring Enterprises
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:44:00 -
[967] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Demonfist wrote:*pats on the head as he's walking out the door*  That's nice. How about, instead, you answer the question: what does what you wrote have to do with any of what you quoted? you're absolutely right. i DO need another beer.  Awesome self-quote in 3... 2... 1... Ok, GO!
"The only launchers i'm interested in having as part of +PV+P are the ones that fire ze missilez!" -- Demonfist |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24278
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:45:00 -
[968] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:you're absolutely right. i need another beer. That's nice. How about you answer the question: what does what you wrote have to do with any of what you quoted? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Nitchiu
EVE University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 21:49:00 -
[969] - Quote
So we are now to the point of I know I lost the argument so I'll pretend I was trolling all along Demonfist? |

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5819
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:20:00 -
[970] - Quote
Nitchiu wrote:So we are now to the point of I know I lost the argument so I'll pretend I was trolling all along Demonfist? Yep, pretty much.
The only problem with that exit strategy is it is also the only course of action left to him that could possibly make him look even worse than he already does. If you like EVE Online and War Thunder content stop by my YouTube channel.-á
Ranger 1 Presents https://www.youtube.com/user/Ranger1Presents |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:25:00 -
[971] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:If bumping is ever made a CONCORD offense, I will invest in salvage drones and MTUs and camp the Jita undock. Which is (again) why I suggested that Bumping should not be a CONCORD offense, rather that victims of a (failed) gank attempt should have a 60 second immunity from Bumping once CONCORD arrives on the scene. Awesome. So from now on, when I want any ship to be immune to bumping - I simply create a throwaway trial account and log in, shoot my freighter in a free Ibis, and enjoy 60 seconds of being immune to game mechanics. I can't see anyone abusing that :P
It's a lot less abusable than CODE bumping freighters to allow 2,3,7, or 15 waves of the EXACT SAME gankers to kill a ship while CONCORD stands at the scene eating donuts.
|

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:26:00 -
[972] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Luckily I haven't lost a ship at all! I simply present again the absurd situation caused by the current game mechanics. "So you find it comprehensible that you and your CODE buddies would show up, try to gank an Orca, get it down to 20% structure, have CONCORD come and kill you and give you an aggression timer...and then do nothing as your buddies sit there for 15 minutes bumping it so it can't escape, with CONCORD at the scene, and then watch as the exact same gankers come right back and finish the job? Seriously? That even conceivably makes sense to you? I refuse to believe that anyone could find that a reasonable game mechanic in highsec." Copying the same post over and over doesn't make it true. I addressed all of those points. Laws in different jurisdictions are different. New Eden has different laws than the real world, and New Eden's capsuleer police (CONCORD) have an extremely limited, reactionary role which fits the laws of New Eden. If you perform an act of illegal aggression in HS, CONCORD destroys your ship, docks you sec status, and gives you a 15min time out. That is their entire function. Their function has nothing to do with protecting anyone, simply with creating cost for illegal aggression in HS. This is how the game was always intended to work and is how it works now. This is the problem with Veers, and something that I have not figured out how to work around. You bring up valid points, he simply ignores them and repeats himself. Over and over again. It's depressing.
Her point were not valid...she simply failed to grasp the basic issues and kept repeating the same talking points. Keep trying DJ. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:27:00 -
[973] - Quote
Demonfist wrote:everytime you say i'm wrong, this pops into my head...
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arther Schopenhauer
I still have a few pages to go before I finish the parts I missed at night, but I just wanted to point out that this?
This is patently asinine.
Being told that you are wrong does not qualify your absurd ramblings as truth. For that to be the case at all, you would have to be adopting the concept of subjective truth, for which Schopenhauer himself would laugh in your face.
If you want to play the esoteric name drop game, Occam's Razor suggests that, since your ideas are meeting such resistance, the simplest explanation is that they are just bad ideas.
Having read a few pages of your doggerel, that's the one I'm going with.
Now, back to the thread. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:32:00 -
[974] - Quote
And the fact still remains that for CONCORD to sit there and allow bumpers to pin down a gank target, while successive waves of the exact same gankers kill it is assinine, and would not be allowed by any conceivable CONCORD like force. It's obviously inconsistent with the purpose of CONCORD, and should be fixed. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:42:00 -
[975] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:And the fact still remains that for CONCORD to sit there and allow bumpers to pin down a gank target, while successive waves of the exact same gankers kill it is assinine, and would not be allowed by any conceivable CONCORD like force. It's obviously inconsistent with the purpose of CONCORD, and should be fixed.
It's perfectly consistent with CONCORD, their purpose is to stop aggression, and they do it with a device that is installed in all capsuleer ships that allows to them to detect the activation of offensive modules.
Offensive modules.
Not turning on your engines. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:46:00 -
[976] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:And the fact still remains that for CONCORD to sit there and allow bumpers to pin down a gank target, while successive waves of the exact same gankers kill it is assinine, and would not be allowed by any conceivable CONCORD like force. It's obviously inconsistent with the purpose of CONCORD, and should be fixed. It's perfectly consistent with CONCORD, their purpose is to stop aggression, and they do it with a device that is installed in all capsuleer ships that allows to them to detect the activation of offensive modules. Offensive modules. Not turning on your engines.
Wrong. CONCORD, as with any police force, would not just care about hypertechnical things like pressing F5. They would focus on stopping ongoing criminal activity once on the scene. And pinning a victim down so that they criminals can come finish the job is obviously criminal nature, and would be stopped by any competent law enforcement agency. |

Nitchiu
EVE University Ivy League
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:47:00 -
[977] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:And the fact still remains that for CONCORD to sit there and allow bumpers to pin down a gank target, while successive waves of the exact same gankers kill it is assinine, and would not be allowed by any conceivable CONCORD like force. It's obviously inconsistent with the purpose of CONCORD, and should be fixed.
Seems consistant to me... no one is shooting anyone so they just wait and eat donuts until someone opens fire. Then they drop on you. Capsuleers bumping Capsuleers isn't gonna bother the empires. No one cares what they do as long as shots aren't fired.
As for the actual game mechanic. First the freighter gets ganked and survives... then the bumpers stick around till the criminal tag wears off for the ganker? And in all this time the freighter can't get anyone to help him? I appreciate that you want to play the game solo or afk but that's like playing WoW and leveling to level 90 without doing anything but gathering herbs. You can do it but why would you do it and then complain that herb gathering doesn't give enough XP? |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:49:00 -
[978] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: Wrong. CONCORD, as with any police force, would not just care about hypertechnical things like pressing F5. They would focus on stopping ongoing criminal activity once on the scene. And pinning a victim down so that they criminals can come finish the job is obviously criminal nature, and would be stopped by any competent law enforcement agency.
No, pressing F5 is literally the only way they know about anything. The aforementioned device informs them of an aggressive activity. Otherwise they wouldn't show up at all. This is well established game lore.
I mean, if you want to compare them to a real police force, we can start having them show up after a 30 minute response time? That would be much closer to a real police force. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:49:00 -
[979] - Quote
Nitchiu wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:And the fact still remains that for CONCORD to sit there and allow bumpers to pin down a gank target, while successive waves of the exact same gankers kill it is assinine, and would not be allowed by any conceivable CONCORD like force. It's obviously inconsistent with the purpose of CONCORD, and should be fixed. Seems consistant to me... no one is shooting anyone so they just wait and eat donuts until someone opens fire. Then they drop on you. Capsuleers bumping Capsuleers isn't gonna bother the empires. No one cares what they do as long as shots aren't fired. As for the actual game mechanic. First the freighter gets ganked and survives... then the bumpers stick around till the criminal tag wears off for the ganker? And in all this time the freighter can't get anyone to help him? I appreciate that you want to play the game solo or afk but that's like playing WoW and leveling to level 90 without doing anything but gathering herbs. You can do it but why would you do it and then complain that herb gathering doesn't give enough XP?
Bumpers are preventing the gank victim from leaving the system with the clear intent of letting their friends come back and hill him. To have the police sitting there and not intervening is downright insane. And it's highsec - you don't need to beg friends to protect you from criminals, that's what CONCORD is for. If you don't want that mechanic, go to nullsec. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:51:00 -
[980] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: Wrong. CONCORD, as with any police force, would not just care about hypertechnical things like pressing F5. They would focus on stopping ongoing criminal activity once on the scene. And pinning a victim down so that they criminals can come finish the job is obviously criminal nature, and would be stopped by any competent law enforcement agency.
No, pressing F5 is literally the only way they know about anything. The aforementioned device informs them of an aggressive activity. Otherwise they wouldn't show up at all. This is well established game lore. I mean, if you want to compare them to a real police force, we can start having them show up after a 30 minute response time? That would be much closer to a real police force.
They are already in the system - the response time is reasonable. But having the ignore unlawful restraint taking place 5 feet away from them, while the 2nd wave of the gank is obviously incoming, is completely absurd. Forget about how you would fix it, just realize that on a conceptual level it makes no sense. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:54:00 -
[981] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: They are already in the system - the response time is reasonable. But having the ignore unlawful restraint taking place 5 feet away from them, while the 2nd wave of the gank is obviously incoming, is completely absurd. Forget about how you would fix it, just realize that on a conceptual level it makes no sense.
No, they are not in the system.
They live in Yulai, they are the only people allowed to bridge in highsec space. It's not "five feet away", it's literally dozens of astronomic units away from them, except for the device that shows them when someone uses an offensive module, they have zero way of knowing.
If you want to make it realistic, the player being attacked or someone else on grid should HAVE to "call the police" before they even start warping to the site of the battle.
That, plus a nice long realistic response time. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Nitchiu
EVE University Ivy League
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:54:00 -
[982] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Nitchiu wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:And the fact still remains that for CONCORD to sit there and allow bumpers to pin down a gank target, while successive waves of the exact same gankers kill it is assinine, and would not be allowed by any conceivable CONCORD like force. It's obviously inconsistent with the purpose of CONCORD, and should be fixed. Seems consistant to me... no one is shooting anyone so they just wait and eat donuts until someone opens fire. Then they drop on you. Capsuleers bumping Capsuleers isn't gonna bother the empires. No one cares what they do as long as shots aren't fired. As for the actual game mechanic. First the freighter gets ganked and survives... then the bumpers stick around till the criminal tag wears off for the ganker? And in all this time the freighter can't get anyone to help him? I appreciate that you want to play the game solo or afk but that's like playing WoW and leveling to level 90 without doing anything but gathering herbs. You can do it but why would you do it and then complain that herb gathering doesn't give enough XP? Bumpers are preventing the gank victim from leaving the system with the clear intent of letting their friends come back and hill him. To have the police sitting there and not intervening is downright insane. And it's highsec - you don't need to beg friends to protect you from criminals, that's what CONCORD is for. If you don't want that mechanic, go to nullsec.
More like CONCORD is to keep the capsuleers from getting too badly out of hand. Notice how they don't even pod the capsuleer. That means that unless your activities fall into very specific guidelines they don't care. They are there to give a slap on the wrist to the capsuleer and then slap him on the wrist if he does it again. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 22:58:00 -
[983] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: They are already in the system - the response time is reasonable. But having the ignore unlawful restraint taking place 5 feet away from them, while the 2nd wave of the gank is obviously incoming, is completely absurd. Forget about how you would fix it, just realize that on a conceptual level it makes no sense.
No, they are not in the system. They live in Yulai, they are the only people allowed to bridge in highsec space. It's not "five feet away", it's literally dozens of astronomic units away from them, except for the device that shows them when someone uses an offensive module, they have zero way of knowing. If you want to make it realistic, the player being attacked or someone else on grid should HAVE to "call the police" before they even start warping to the site of the battle. That, plus a nice long realistic response time.
The fact that CONCORD being spawned in the system in a different location lengthens response times suggest that CONCORD is tied to the system in some manner. And anyhow, the response time is designed with the dps v. ehp in mind....if they wanted it to take 10 mins for CONCORD to respond they would need to drastically reduce dps. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:03:00 -
[984] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: The fact that CONCORD being spawned in the system in a different location lengthens response times suggest that CONCORD is tied to the system in some manner.
No, it does not. They control the system called "Yulai", which is their headquarters. And, as I mentioned, that is well established in the game already.
Quote: And anyhow, the response time is designed with the dps v. ehp in mind....
No, it's not. It was designed a long time ago, and was not changed after the various ship buffs.
Quote:
if they wanted it to take 10 mins for CONCORD to respond they would need to drastically reduce dps.
No they wouldn't, that's not realistic. The police don't have the power to make criminals' activity simply take longer just because.
It's perfectly realistic for CONCORD to show up in ten minutes instead of 28 seconds, because that's what real cops do, show up long, long after a crime is already finished.
Sounds fair to me. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Christopher AET
hirr Northern Coalition.
788
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:04:00 -
[985] - Quote
Hello people who are dissatisfied. I am here to provide a step by step guide for solving all your woes.
1-Determine you dislike the state of suicide ganking in hisec
2-Move out of hisec
Wow that was hard! I drain ducks of their moisture for sustenance. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24284
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:11:00 -
[986] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Wrong. CONCORD, as with any police force CONCORD is not a police force.
Quote:But having the ignore unlawful restraint taking place 5 feet away from them, while the 2nd wave of the gank is obviously incoming, is completely absurd. They're not ignoring any unlawful restraint taking place.
Again, what you are supposed to do is demonstrate GÇö using actual facts GÇö that something isn't working as intended as far as bumping and ganking goes. You had three attempts, we'll count that as strike #1.
Attempt #2, go! GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
988
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:13:00 -
[987] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience. ..... sod it... FALCON FOR LEAD GAME DESIGNER!  Lieutenant Turelus Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
I post on my main... shocking I know! |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:16:00 -
[988] - Quote
Christopher AET wrote:Hello people who are dissatisfied. I am here to provide a step by step guide for solving all your woes.
1-Determine you dislike the state of suicide ganking in hisec
2-Move out of hisec
Wow that was hard!
Gee thanks....how original. I would actually prefer to intelligently discuss the reasons why I dislike the current mechanics, and suggest improvements to make the mechanics consistent with the principle of highsec. I'm the first guy to lolz when i see a Wreathe ganked with 1.5 bil in cargo inside. What did not make me lolz was seeing a well fit Orca ( 300k+ ehp v. Void) survive an initial CODE gank attempt with 20% structure left, get bumped by some CODe alts for 15 minutes with CONCORD sitting there doing nothing, rendering the Orca unable to warp off despite its bets efforts, and then seeing the exact same gankers reappear and finish off the job. To me that is a "full stop. This does not make sense" moment, and so instead of "mov[ing] out of hisec," I decided to raise the issue, and suggest a worthwile change.
I do realize that people like DJ deeply oppose this, since it will make it harder to blow things up and generate tears. Alas as far as DJ goes, I've come to doubt the genuineness of his statements, for as the great Upton Sinclair put it "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
|

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:18:00 -
[989] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Wrong. CONCORD, as with any police force CONCORD is not a police force. Quote:But having the ignore unlawful restraint taking place 5 feet away from them, while the 2nd wave of the gank is obviously incoming, is completely absurd. They're not ignoring any unlawful restraint taking place. Strike #1. Attempt #2, go!
Why do people keep comparing concord to the police? Even Falcon Punch himself made this comparison. It's not at all realistic.
Here's what Concord would do if they resembled the actual police. They'd all get together in their SWAT battleships and go blow up some poor nullsec minmatar outpost where they were manufacturing boosters despite it being outside their jurisdiction. Then they'd repeatedly brutalize all the players who used boosters with their happy sticks while ignoring all the murders and ganks in highsec.
Then all the poor pilots would get forcefully biomassed and all the rich pilots would be allowed to do whatever they wanted. Not a forum alt.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:18:00 -
[990] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Wrong. CONCORD, as with any police force CONCORD is not a police force. Quote:But having the ignore unlawful restraint taking place 5 feet away from them, while the 2nd wave of the gank is obviously incoming, is completely absurd. They're not ignoring any unlawful restraint taking place. Again, what you are supposed to do is demonstrate GÇö using actual facts GÇö that something isn't working as intended as far as bumping and ganking goes. You had three attempts, we'll count that as strike #1. Attempt #2, go!
CONCORD most certainly is a police force. Per the Eve Wiki "CONCORD is branched into numerous divisions, each of which handles a certain aspect of the empire relationship. Of these divisions the CAD (Commerce Assessment Department), which oversees inter-stellar trade agreements and regulations; and DED (Directive Enforcement Department), which oversees policing in space, are by far the largest and most influential."
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CONCORD |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24286
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:21:00 -
[991] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I would actually prefer to intelligently discuss the reasons why I dislike the current mechanics, and suggest improvements to make the mechanics consistent with the principle of highsec. Can you explain how they are inconsistent at the moment? What is this GÇ£principle of highsecGÇ¥ you believe they should adhere to?
Quote:What did not make me lolz was seeing a well fit Orca ( 300k+ ehp v. Void) survive an initial CODE gank attempt with 20% structure left, get bumped by some CODe alts for 15 minutes with CONCORD sitting there doing nothing, rendering the Orca unable to warp off despite its bets efforts Good news: what you describe has never actually happened for the simple reason that it can't happen. You can keep repeating this nonsense as much as you like, but it will not change the fact that you are complaining about something that does not exist in the game, and you're using this hallucination as a incoherent argument for changing that game.
This is why I keep asking you to use actual facts. So, again: attempt #2! GÇö GO!
Veers Belvar wrote:CONCORD most certainly is a police force. Per the Eve Wiki "CONCORD is branched into numerous divisions, each of which handles a certain aspect of the empire relationship. Of these divisions the CAD (Commerce Assessment Department), which oversees inter-stellar trade agreements and regulations; and DED (Directive Enforcement Department), which oversees policing in space, are by far the largest and most influential." GǪand they're still not a police force. Just because you oversee the policing of something something does not make you a police force (at best, that makes you a Justice Department). In fact, the game already has a police GÇö CONCORD isn't it.
Would you like to call this attempt (and strike) #2 and go direct to #3, or would you like to actually provide a proper answer. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9426
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:22:00 -
[992] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I would actually prefer to intelligently discuss the reasons why I dislike the current mechanics, and suggest improvements to make the mechanics consistent with the principle of highsec.
Why would you bother, when a literal developer has come in here over several successive days to tell you that everything you think is wrong according to CCP?
Quote:I decided to raise the issue, and suggest a worthwile change.
No, what you are doing is suggesting that an explicitly non hostile act be made into something that will get your ship destroyed.
Oh, and as for your Sinclair quote. That is hilarious coming from someone defending afk hauling with every breath.
You can't figure out that suicide ganking, and destruction of assets in general, is quite literally vital to the existence of the game, because that means that you have to consider that each and every loss of those losers who can't figure out how to bring webs for their hauler is just and necessary. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Lilliana Stelles
1247
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:26:00 -
[993] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Christopher AET wrote:Hello people who are dissatisfied. I am here to provide a step by step guide for solving all your woes.
1-Determine you dislike the state of suicide ganking in hisec
2-Move out of hisec
Wow that was hard! Gee thanks....how original. I would actually prefer to intelligently discuss the reasons why I dislike the current mechanics, and suggest improvements to make the mechanics consistent with the principle of highsec. I'm the first guy to lolz when i see a Wreathe ganked with 1.5 bil in cargo inside. What did not make me lolz was seeing a well fit Orca ( 300k+ ehp v. Void) survive an initial CODE gank attempt with 20% structure left, get bumped by some CODe alts for 15 minutes with CONCORD sitting there doing nothing, rendering the Orca unable to warp off despite its bets efforts, and then seeing the exact same gankers reappear and finish off the job. To me that is a "full stop. This does not make sense" moment, and so instead of "mov[ing] out of hisec," I decided to raise the issue, and suggest a worthwile change. I do realize that people like DJ deeply oppose this, since it will make it harder to blow things up and generate tears. Alas as far as DJ goes, I've come to doubt the genuineness of his statements, for as the great Upton Sinclair put it "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
Wait what, how do you let this happen. I've been bumped in a freighter before. It's not that hard to get out. Just turn orca/freigther around, face away from the gate. Get bumped, then use that velocity instawarp to something in the direction you're bumped. Asteriod belt, station, gate, whatever.
Almost always there's something directly opposite the gate, in the direction you're being bumped. Not a forum alt.-á |

Omar Alharazaad
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
501
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:26:00 -
[994] - Quote
There are far too many silly people in this thread not being nearly funny enough.
I'm beginning to think the avalanche of troll posts was fabricated with the sole intention of either simply burying all the valid points made on both sides, or simply an attempt to end any reasonable discussion via lock.
Meh. |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1272
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:31:00 -
[995] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:[quote=Nitchiu][quote=Veers Belvar]And it's highsec - you don't need to beg friends to protect you from criminals, that's what CONCORD is for. If you don't want that mechanic, go to nullsec. CONCORD is the consequence, not the protection. |
|

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2028

|
Posted - 2014.08.31 23:37:00 -
[996] - Quote
Thread temporarily locked for some cleaning.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2032

|
Posted - 2014.09.01 00:38:00 -
[997] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.
By posting this I inadvertently bump this rather large thread back to the top of the front page, as to not let it warp off to the abyss of forgotten threads. Thread re-opened. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|

Ashiri Hareka
Paper Cats
4
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 01:33:00 -
[998] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote: Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.
While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode.
Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
That is what I like about this game. One's destiny is up to one's self, not dependent on some story that one is forced to follow. What I fail to understand is why some people, even after you've explained all this, still want their hand held.
|

Matrea D
Maggie's Magical Miners Maggie's Magical Malliance
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 01:41:00 -
[999] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: Bumpers are preventing the gank victim from leaving the system with the clear intent of letting their friends come back and hill him. To have the police sitting there and not intervening is downright insane.
CONCORD doesn't interfere with the initial bumping, but they should interfere during the second bumping?
It's not like CONCORD is there to help people who don't understand game mechanics. "Oh, this pilot doesn't know how to get out of being bumped, we'd better do something about that."
Veers Belvar wrote:And it's highsec - you don't need to beg friends to protect you from criminals, that's what CONCORD is for. If you don't want that mechanic, go to nullsec.
CONCORD are not your fleet members. They do not replace having fleet support. Stop trying to make it.
Also, please tell me where it says that highsec is where you don't need friends to protect you. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20623
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 01:48:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Ashiri Hareka wrote:CCP Falcon wrote: Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.
While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode.
Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
That is what I like about this game. One's destiny is up to one's self, not dependent on some story that one is forced to follow. What I fail to understand is why some people, even after you've explained all this, still want their hand held. Likewise, I mostly play the PvE, my PvP is not being the fool who gets ganked.
Sun Tzu wrote:To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy* A wise man indeed, he'd have enjoyed Eve.
*/me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5431
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 01:58:00 -
[1001] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Sun Tzu wrote:To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy* A wise man indeed, he'd have enjoyed Eve. */me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War
[:baton:]
Read a better one.
Veers Belvar wrote:And it's highsec - you don't need to beg friends to protect you from criminals, that's what CONCORD is for.
Whoever told you this lied. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20624
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 02:08:00 -
[1002] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Sun Tzu wrote:To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy* A wise man indeed, he'd have enjoyed Eve. */me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War [:baton:] Read a better one. lol I consider going on a few ops with the the miner bumping guys one of the best things I've ever done in Eve. Very educational. The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5431
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 02:25:00 -
[1003] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Sun Tzu wrote:To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy* A wise man indeed, he'd have enjoyed Eve. */me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War [:baton:] Read a better one. lol I consider going on a few ops with the the miner bumping guys one of the best things I've ever done in Eve. Very educational.
I meant a better book on warfare.
The lesson is solid, there are just better texts. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3874
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 02:53:00 -
[1004] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:*/me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War i don't need to beat you, i attacked your wagons instead
you know you need more wagons to supply your supply wagons? yes you do because you read a book about fighting on horseback |

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
20624
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:02:00 -
[1005] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:*/me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War i don't need to beat you, i attacked your wagons instead you know you need more wagons to supply your supply wagons? yes you do because you read a book about fighting on horseback Cursed Foiled again 
Also relevant
The difference between a carebear and a bear is that one expects the world to revolve around them, the other accepts the world for what it is and works around it.
Nil mortifi sine lucre. |

Derrick Miles
EVENumbers
4708
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:03:00 -
[1006] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:*/me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War i don't need to beat you, i attacked your wagons instead you know you need more wagons to supply your supply wagons? yes you do because you read a book about fighting on horseback Did you know that modern militaries still have supply lines? And that millennia old lessons on strategy still apply today? |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3874
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:12:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Derrick Miles wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:*/me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War i don't need to beat you, i attacked your wagons instead you know you need more wagons to supply your supply wagons? yes you do because you read a book about fighting on horseback Did you know that modern militaries still have supply lines? And that millennia old lessons on strategy still apply today? did you know that hummingbirds flap their wings up to two hundred times a second |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24292
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:18:00 -
[1008] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Derrick Miles wrote:Did you know that modern militaries still have supply lines? And that millennia old lessons on strategy still apply today? did you know that hummingbirds flap their wings up to two hundred times a second Did you know that so do bumblebees, and that there's nothing particularly strange about their fight? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5433
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:22:00 -
[1009] - Quote
Derrick Miles wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:*/me dons his forum armour and waits for the inevitable beating that results from quoting The Art of War i don't need to beat you, i attacked your wagons instead you know you need more wagons to supply your supply wagons? yes you do because you read a book about fighting on horseback Did you know that modern militaries still have supply lines? And that millennia old lessons on strategy still apply today?
Which is why people are ganking Freighters. (Look at that, we're on topic again)
A lot of Sun Tzu's work *is* quite specific to his era, and most of the rest is presented better elsewhere. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3874
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:23:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Derrick Miles wrote:Did you know that modern militaries still have supply lines? And that millennia old lessons on strategy still apply today? did you know that hummingbirds flap their wings up to two hundred times a second Did you know that so do bumblebees, and that there's nothing particularly strange about their fight? false. bumblebee flight was scrutinised and objectively found to be adorable |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24292
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:25:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Tippia wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Derrick Miles wrote:Did you know that modern militaries still have supply lines? And that millennia old lessons on strategy still apply today? did you know that hummingbirds flap their wings up to two hundred times a second Did you know that so do bumblebees, and that there's nothing particularly strange about their fight? false. bumblebee flight was scrutinised and objectively found to be adorable Bah! Humbug. Unfair h4x argument.  GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4337
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:49:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Lilliana Stelles wrote:Gotta run for an hour or so and I don't really have time to address this, but I'd like to point out: I think you're confused on the difference between risk and cost. From the dictionary. Risk: the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen (this doesn't apply to suicide ganking as the consequence is guaranteed). Cost: something that is lost, damaged, or given up in order to achieve or get something
Without gankers, haulers would operate without risk. None at all. And for the gankers, there is always the risk of failure, especially if the victim is capable of mitigating the gank. This, however, takes effort.
Benny's not confused on these points. You are. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9434
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:51:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Lilliana Stelles wrote:Gotta run for an hour or so and I don't really have time to address this, but I'd like to point out: I think you're confused on the difference between risk and cost. From the dictionary. Risk: the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen (this doesn't apply to suicide ganking as the consequence is guaranteed). Cost: something that is lost, damaged, or given up in order to achieve or get something Without gankers, haulers would operate without risk. None at all. And for the gankers, there is always the risk of failure, especially if the victim is capable of mitigating the gank. This, however, takes effort. Benny's not confused on these points. You are.
That's a good point, Remiel. Hauling does not have enough native risk on it's own.
I think we need to bring out gatecamping rats for highsec. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4337
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:54:00 -
[1014] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:
Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion.
It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on.
Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden.
Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent.
While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode.
The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things.
True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond.
The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top.
EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered.
EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish.
EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers.
Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions.
EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time.
Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced.
That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence.
Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
You sir just put into the perfect words every single reason why I play EVE. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |

Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4339
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:57:00 -
[1015] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Lilliana Stelles wrote:Gotta run for an hour or so and I don't really have time to address this, but I'd like to point out: I think you're confused on the difference between risk and cost. From the dictionary. Risk: the possibility that something bad or unpleasant (such as an injury or a loss) will happen (this doesn't apply to suicide ganking as the consequence is guaranteed). Cost: something that is lost, damaged, or given up in order to achieve or get something Without gankers, haulers would operate without risk. None at all. And for the gankers, there is always the risk of failure, especially if the victim is capable of mitigating the gank. This, however, takes effort. Benny's not confused on these points. You are. That's a good point, Remiel. Hauling does not have enough native risk on it's own. I think we need to bring out gatecamping rats for highsec.
I've always supported this measure, and I don't personally see why it's not already a thing. You get rats in belts, why not on gates? The only reason I can think of is that it'd be a bit weird to have them and the navies on the gates not shooting each other. But that's easy to fix - just have them shooting each other when they're on the same gate, it'll add some immersion. Seriously, why DON'T NPCs ever shoot at each other? I've never seen it. Anyway, I'm sidetracking.... GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:02:00 -
[1016] - Quote
Matrea D wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: Bumpers are preventing the gank victim from leaving the system with the clear intent of letting their friends come back and hill him. To have the police sitting there and not intervening is downright insane.
CONCORD doesn't interfere with the initial bumping, but they should interfere during the second bumping? It's not like CONCORD is there to help people who don't understand game mechanics. "Oh, this pilot doesn't know how to get out of being bumped, we'd better do something about that." Veers Belvar wrote:And it's highsec - you don't need to beg friends to protect you from criminals, that's what CONCORD is for. If you don't want that mechanic, go to nullsec. CONCORD are not your fleet members. They do not replace having fleet support. Stop trying to make it. Also, please tell me where it says that highsec is where you don't need friends to protect you.
They should allow the target to escape the bumping, as any law enforcement force would. CONCORD is there to punish criminal activity, and being pinned down so that successive waves of gankers can shoot you is clearly criminal in this context.
|

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5434
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:07:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:They should allow the target to escape the bumping,
The target can. (Though it's much easier to avoid it in the first place)
Quote:as any law enforcement force would.
They aren't one.
Quote:CONCORD is there to punish criminal activity,
Finally, you understand.
Quote:and being pinned down so that successive waves of gankers can shoot you is clearly criminal in this context.
Bumping, not matter what the context, is not a criminal action in New Eden. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9434
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:09:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: They should allow the target to escape the bumping
The target should just do it themselves. No added mechanics are needed for that.
Quote: as any law enforcement force would.
Real law enforcement has to be called to the scene if they aren't already present.
So, since you're so big on realism you'd have no idea with CONCORD having to be manually called by the person being attacked, right?
Quote: CONCORD is there to punish criminal activity, and being pinned down so that successive waves of gankers can shoot you is clearly criminal in this context.
No, it's not, it involves zero use of an offensive module, which is the only thing that they care about. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:14:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: They should allow the target to escape the bumping
The target should just do it themselves. No added mechanics are needed for that. Quote: as any law enforcement force would.
Real law enforcement has to be called to the scene if they aren't already present. So, since you're so big on realism you'd have no idea with CONCORD having to be manually called by the person being attacked, right? Quote: CONCORD is there to punish criminal activity, and being pinned down so that successive waves of gankers can shoot you is clearly criminal in this context.
No, it's not, it involves zero use of an offensive module, which is the only thing that they care about.
CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly.
|

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:18:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly.
So now you do want bumping to be a criminal act. CONCORD response in EVE means one and only one thing, swift and inevitable destruction of the offending ship. Now, depending on implementation, you get to pick one of two options: 1) Ganking no longer requires ship loss (if bumping is a Suspect action) 2) CONCORD provides the DPS for ganks (if bumping is a Criminal action) "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9434
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:18:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly.
Yes, it should. That is the only way for the game engine to tell whether or not someone has committed an aggressive action. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:21:00 -
[1022] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly. So now you do want bumping to be a criminal act. CONCORD response in EVE means one and only one thing, swift and inevitable destruction of the offending ship. Now, depending on implementation, you get to pick one of two options: 1) Ganking no longer requires ship loss (if bumping is a Suspect action) 2) CONCORD provides the DPS for ganks (if bumping is a Criminal action)
No, if you have been paying any attention at all (which I am beginning to doubt), I stated that since there is no simple way to differentiate between criminal and non-criminal bumping, the appropriate response is to grant a gank-victim a 60 second window where they are able to warp off regardless of if they are been bumped or not. So neither 1 nor 2 are implicated.
|

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Unleashed Pestilence
990
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:23:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Because he paid a price for that privilege. I was thinking of some 500 million ISK per shot. Maybe less, maybe more. That could be debated.
But, to your question: Why should someone lose his ship just because he's been outnumbered? Specially since he can be outnumbered by someone whose only effort was to buy ISBoxer and pay several accounts to CCP, which is very literally a way to pay for win. Wait, wait, wait.
You're now setting a balancing factor based on isk? Why shouldn't everyone have access to this idea if its so great? New player resources: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Main_Page - General information http://www.evealtruist.com/p/know-your-enemy.html - Learn to PvP http://belligerentundesirables.com/ - Safaris, Awoxes, Ganking and Griefing-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:23:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly.
Yes, it should. That is the only way for the game engine to tell whether or not someone has committed an aggressive action.
Which is why i provided my 60 second free escape proposal. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9434
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:26:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly.
Yes, it should. That is the only way for the game engine to tell whether or not someone has committed an aggressive action. Which is why i provided my 60 second free escape proposal.
And that's a terrible idea that "fixes" something that isn't a problem in the first place.
Why do you insist on going in circles? Did you not get the memo, in this very thread? We win, you lose. It's not up for debate, there is no "difference of opinion", and there will be no compromise. You are wrong. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Ryuichi Tigh
Nex Exercitus Northern Coalition.
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:29:00 -
[1026] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
Bit late to this party but this .. all of it ... Exactly what Eve is. Totally nailed! I plan to live forever.... or die trying - Vila Restal - Blakes 7 (1979 -1981) |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:31:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote: CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model - as for your other points, I have already answered them repeatedly.
Yes, it should. That is the only way for the game engine to tell whether or not someone has committed an aggressive action. Which is why i provided my 60 second free escape proposal. And that's a terrible idea that "fixes" something that isn't a problem in the first place. Why do you insist on going in circles? Did you not get the memo, in this very thread? We win, you lose. It's not up for debate, there is no "difference of opinion", and there will be no compromise. You are wrong.
What I "do get" is that you are not a CCP Dev and will not be determining policy on this matter (you already are on record as being opposed to letting freighters have rig slots). As pointed out already by me....already today Loyalanon (CEO of CODE) has killed two Orcas, a Charon, 3 Obelisks, and a Rhea, all today. Something is seriously broken here, and needs to be fixed. |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7951
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:33:00 -
[1028] - Quote
I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:37:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity.
Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. And pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers (the original topic of this thread) is something that CCP should be aware of, as it considers whether the current game mechanics are having their intended impact on highsec. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9434
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:37:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote: What I "do get" is that you are not a CCP Dev and will not be determining policy on this matter
No, but the dev who posted already laid it out.
You lose. You get nothing.
You only get a few choices:
Learn to play.
Get used to being used as a chew toy by a real player.
Quit.
Quote: (you already are on record as being opposed to letting freighters have rig slots).
Yeah, because I'm actually a pretty big independent hauler, and the changes were an overall nerf, exactly like I said they would be. I drank their tears in that freighter thread, because I know that even if it's an overall nerf, the real players will adapt, and the bad players will die like dogs with their three cargo mods.
Quote: As pointed out already by me....already today Loyalanon (CEO of CODE) has killed two Orcas, a Charon, 3 Obelisks, and a Rhea, all today. Something is seriously broken here, and needs to be fixed.
First of all, good for him. I haven't had much playtime available lately, thanks to the kid.
Secondly, Freighters dying is not broken. They are allowed to die, in fact they're supposed to die. Every ship is supposed to die, that's how the economy works. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5437
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:42:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:No, if you have been paying any attention at all (which I am beginning to doubt), I stated that since there is no simple way to differentiate between criminal and non-criminal bumping, the appropriate response is to grant a gank-victim a 60 second window where they are able to warp off regardless of if they are been bumped or not. So neither 1 nor 2 are implicated.
1) That's not a CONCORD response. 2) Why should they get an automagic effortless escape? 3) How does getting shot at suddenly make you incorporeal? How does getting shot at illegally do that differently than getting shot at legally?
Veers Belvar wrote:What I "do get" is that you are not a CCP Dev and will not be determining policy on this matter (you already are on record as being opposed to letting freighters have rig slots). As pointed out already by me....already today Loyalanon (CEO of CODE) has killed two Orcas, a Charon, 3 Obelisks, and a Rhea, all today. Something is seriously broken here, and needs to be fixed.
And what percent of traffic is that? You say it's broken, you must know the relative frequency. Tell you what, I'll even offer to do the math for you if you provide a 15 minute sample of Freighter, JF, and Orca undocks from Jita 4-4 "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:51:00 -
[1032] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. Except that, once again, false imprisonment is not a Criminal Action in EVE. Only activating an offensive module against an illegal target is. Quote:is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers [Citation Needed]
Well, your side gave the number of 1.4 freighters killed a day. Look at Loyalanon's killboard - he is on course to eclipse that by himself!
And the point is not to debate whether bumping is currently a crime or not, the point is to debate whether, in this context, it SHOULD be a crime. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:52:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity. Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. Yes it is crying, they've pretty much said no everytime they've talked about this stuff. Even if they hadn't, look at how much opposition the idea gets. Post this idea in the features and ideas forum, or the CSM forums, and you'll get the same response because what you are asking for goes against the nature of the game. You can waste your time like this if you want, it;s your time, but you could be having actual fun figuring out how to do for yourself what you are asking CCP to do. EVE Online is a video game, it's there to give you a place to experiment and succeed. It's not here to play itself for you. Quote: And pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers (the original topic of this thread) is something that CCP should be aware of, as it considers whether the current game mechanics are having their intended impact on highsec.
If you want them to address a 'problem', provide them (and us) proof that there is a problem. Then you might get some support.
Was it "crying" when they decided to add rigs slots to freighters? Or was it instead a reasonable decisions by CCP in response to reasonable complaints on the forums? |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24293
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:54:00 -
[1034] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:They should allow the target to escape the bumping, as any law enforcement force would. This is already the case, and CONCORD is not a law enforcement force.
Quote:CONCORD is there to punish criminal activity, and being pinned down so that successive waves of gankers can shoot you is clearly criminal in this context. No, it really isn't.
Quote:CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model Why not? That is, after all, the only thing that really defines aggressive actions GÇö the one thing CONCORD punishes.
Quote:the appropriate response is to grant a gank-victim a 60 second window where they are able to warp off regardless of if they are been bumped or not. This would mean breaking the physics of the game and making them inconsistent under very odd circumstances to achieve something that isn't needed to begin with. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1275
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:55:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Was it "crying" when they decided to add rigs slots to freighters? Or was it instead a reasonable decisions by CCP in response to reasonable complaints on the forums? It started out as people wanting to do something somewhat interesting with their ships, not expecting a nerf to compensate for the most part. If you read the crazy storm of agonized tears that came from that thread when the initial nerfs were shown, you'd understand what most pilots had been expecting. Which was basically just adding slots and nothing more. Straight up buff. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:55:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:They should allow the target to escape the bumping, as any law enforcement force would. This is already the case, and CONCORD is not a law enforcement force. Yes it is. Quote:CONCORD is there to punish criminal activity, and being pinned down so that successive waves of gankers can shoot you is clearly criminal in this context. No, it really isn't. Of course it is. Quote:CONCORD response should not depend on the activation of an offensive model Why not? That is, after all, the only thing that really defines aggressive actions GÇö the one thing CONCORD punishes. Entrapment is an aggressive action. Quote:the appropriate response is to grant a gank-victim a 60 second window where they are able to warp off regardless of if they are been bumped or not. This would mean breaking the physics of the game and making them inconsistent under very odd circumstances to achieve something that isn't needed to begin with.
Hardly, look at it as CONCORD escorting the gank victim to safety.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24293
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:57:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:What I "do get" is that you are not a CCP Dev and will not be determining policy on this matter (you already are on record as being opposed to letting freighters have rig slots). As pointed out already by me....already today Loyalanon (CEO of CODE) has killed two Orcas, a Charon, 3 Obelisks, and a Rhea, all today. Something is seriously broken here, and needs to be fixed. What's broken and why? And whether or not he's a CCP dev, their policy on the matter exactly echoes what he says.
Quote:Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) They already do, you know. This is the fact you keep ignoring because it means that your wishes are without basis or reason.
Quote:It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. It already does. You have yet to provide GÇö using actual facts GÇö any example of them not doing so.
Quote:A nd pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers Do you have any evidence to support that claim? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24293
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:58:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Hardly, look at it as CONCORD escorting the gank victim to safety. So you're asking them to completely and fundamentally change what CONCORD is for no good reason? Why on earth should they do that?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:58:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Was it "crying" when they decided to add rigs slots to freighters? Or was it instead a reasonable decisions by CCP in response to reasonable complaints on the forums? It started out as people wanting to do something somewhat interesting with their ships, not expecting a nerf to compensate for the most part. If you read the crazy storm of agonized tears that came from that thread when the initial nerfs were shown, you'd understand what most pilots had been expecting. Which was basically just adding slots and nothing more. Straight up buff.
I consider it a significant buff, in that smart haulers can add a lot of ehp (stupid ones will use expanded cargoholds). If they would get rid of the bumping exploit, and make it more painful to have -10 sec status, the absurd increase in freighter ganking would start to decline back to normal. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 04:59:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Hardly, look at it as CONCORD escorting the gank victim to safety. So you're asking them to completely and fundamentally change what CONCORD is for no good reason? Why on earth should they do that?
I don't see how intelligently responding to false imprisonment and escorting a victim to safety "fundamentally changes what CONCORD is for." |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1275
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:00:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Rowells wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Was it "crying" when they decided to add rigs slots to freighters? Or was it instead a reasonable decisions by CCP in response to reasonable complaints on the forums? It started out as people wanting to do something somewhat interesting with their ships, not expecting a nerf to compensate for the most part. If you read the crazy storm of agonized tears that came from that thread when the initial nerfs were shown, you'd understand what most pilots had been expecting. Which was basically just adding slots and nothing more. Straight up buff. I consider it a significant buff, in that smart haulers can add a lot of ehp (stupid ones will use expanded cargoholds). If they would get rid of the bumping exploit, and make it more painful to have -10 sec status, the absurd increase in freighter ganking would start to decline back to normal. I agree that adding slots was great, however I'm not seeing anywhere where there is a massive increase in ganking, or for that matter ganking, using multiple waves via bumpbing. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24293
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:03:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I don't see how intelligently responding to false imprisonment and escorting a victim to safety "fundamentally changes what CONCORD is for." CONCORD is not there for your protection.
Quote:Yes it is.
Of course it is. This is you making stuff up again, without any basis in reality. You should stop doing that because it means that any argument you base on that ignorant nonsense is itself ignorant and incorrect.
No, CONCORD is not a police force. It's that simple and you have failed spectacularly to demonstrate otherwise. No, being pinned down very clearly is not a criminal act GÇö the devs themselves say so. Anything you say to the contrary means prove yourself completely clueless about how the game works. The more you keep repeating these lies, the less your argument has any value or coherence.
Quote:Entrapment is an aggressive action. GǪand CONCORD already responds to that. Since you are not familiar with the basic game mechanics involved, you do not know this. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:03:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Rowells wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Was it "crying" when they decided to add rigs slots to freighters? Or was it instead a reasonable decisions by CCP in response to reasonable complaints on the forums? It started out as people wanting to do something somewhat interesting with their ships, not expecting a nerf to compensate for the most part. If you read the crazy storm of agonized tears that came from that thread when the initial nerfs were shown, you'd understand what most pilots had been expecting. Which was basically just adding slots and nothing more. Straight up buff. I consider it a significant buff, in that smart haulers can add a lot of ehp (stupid ones will use expanded cargoholds). If they would get rid of the bumping exploit, and make it more painful to have -10 sec status, the absurd increase in freighter ganking would start to decline back to normal. I agree that adding slots was great, however I'm not seeing anywhere where there is a massive increase in ganking, or for that matter ganking, using multiple waves via bumpbing.
Check out this killboard https://zkillboard.com/character/1941616627/
Remember that on average 1.4 freighters die a day in the ENTIRE EVE UNIVERSE. And this is just one guy. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:05:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:I don't see how intelligently responding to false imprisonment and escorting a victim to safety "fundamentally changes what CONCORD is for." CONCORD is not there for your protection. Quote:Yes it is.
Of course it is. This is you making stuff up again, without any basis in reality. You should stop doing that because it means that any argument you base on that ignorant nonsense is itself ignorant and incorrect. No, CONCORD is not a police force. It's that simple and you have failed spectacularly to demonstrate otherwise. No, being pinned down very clearly is not a criminal act GÇö the devs themselves say so. Anything you say to the contrary means prove yourself completely clueless about how the game works. The more you keep repeating these lies, the less your argument has any value or coherence. Quote:Entrapment is an aggressive action. GǪand CONCORD already responds to that. Since you are not familiar with the basic game mechanics involved, you do not know this.
Spouting the same talking points over and over does not an argument make, but my point is not to convince you as "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." |

Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
44
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:05:00 -
[1045] - Quote
DJentropy Ovaert wrote: HTFU. Adapt or die. Beware the falcon punch.
Confirming this is my new signature. HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24293
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:07:00 -
[1046] - Quote
What is that statistic based on? And where is the evidence of this supposed massive increase in ganking?
Veers Belvar wrote:Spouting the same talking points over and over does not an argument make So stop doing it and provide an actual argument instead. Preferably one based on facts rater than stuff you've dreamed up based on hearsay and a deep unfamiliarity of game mechanics.
You keep making all these claims. You can't prove any of them. All of them have been disproven over and over again. So why do you keep repeating the same disproven nonsense; the same lies; and the same fallacies if you know that this does not actually provide you with any kind of coherent argument? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:11:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What is that statistic based on? And where is the evidence of this supposed massive increase in ganking? Veers Belvar wrote:Spouting the same talking points over and over does not an argument make So stop doing it and provide an actual argument instead. Preferably one based on facts rater than stuff you've dreamed up based on hearsay and a deep unfamiliarity of game mechanics. You keep making all these claims. You can't prove any of them. All of them have been disproven over and over again. So why do you keep repeating the same disproven nonsense; the same lies; and the same fallacies if you know that this does not actually provide you with any kind of coherent argument?
your partner in crime cited it - see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4974305#post4974305
I make claims that are reasonable and true. You declare them false with neither evidence nor reason, and then cry when I restate my claims. Uncless you actually disprove them (essentially impossible since they are true), I will continue to restate them.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24293
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:15:00 -
[1048] - Quote
GǪand what is it based on?
Quote:I make claims that are reasonable and true. No. You make claims that you have no support for and no reasoning behind. You make claims that are trivially demonstrably false because they contradict actual game mechanics. You make claims that directly contradict dev statements. You make claims that you have no experience with.
Quote:You declare them false with Both evidence and reason GÇö neither of which you accept because reality does not match up with your fantasy world. When asked to provide any supporting evidence for your fantasy, you have never been able to produce any and instead just kept repeating the same disproven lies in the hope that they will become true.
Let's repeat that: all of your lies have been disproven already. You continue to restate them anyway, so that is just another one of your lies. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7952
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:18:00 -
[1049] - Quote
I just went back and read some of this thread, are these people actually using the terms 'entrapment' and 'false imprisonment'.
As someone in actual Law Enforcement, let me tell you, you don't have the foggiest idea what those terms mean. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:18:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪand what is it based on? Quote:I make claims that are reasonable and true. No. You make claims that you have no support for and no reasoning behind. You make claims that are trivially demonstrably false because they contradict actual game mechanics. You make claims that directly contradict dev statements. You make claims that you have no experience with. Quote:You declare them false with Both evidence and reason GÇö neither of which you accept because reality does not match up with your fantasy world. When asked to provide any supporting evidence for your fantasy, you have never been able to produce any and instead just kept repeating the same disproven lies in the hope that they will become true. Let's repeat that: all of your lies have been disproven already. You continue to restate them anyway, so that is just another one of your lies.
Yawn...just lying over and over again does not an argument make. Since you have provided not a shred of evidence so far, I'm not even sure how to reply to you. But do feel free to keep posting whatever delusions you cling to, its quite amusing.
And as for the 1.4 number, why don't you ask your fellow poster instead of asking me? |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:20:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I just went back and read some of this thread, are these people actually using the terms 'entrapment' and 'false imprisonment'.
As someone in actual Law Enforcement, let me tell you, you don't have the foggiest idea what those terms mean.
Let me assure you that as a licensed attorney in the United States, I know EXACTLY what those terms mean. But thanks for giving me the opinion of someone in "actual law enforcement," because those people tend to be experts at statutory nuance.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24296
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:22:00 -
[1052] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Let me assure you that as a licensed attorney in the United States, I know EXACTLY what those terms mean. So why do you keep misusing them and use them to refer to things that are not related?
I take it that this assurance is on the same level as your assurance that you are familiar with the game mechanics GÇö a familiarity you immediately disproved by citing GÇ£factsGÇ¥ that were in direct contradiction to said game mechanics. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:24:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Let me assure you that as a licensed attorney in the United States, I know EXACTLY what those terms mean. So why do you keep misusing them and use them to refer to things that are not related? I take it that this assurance is on the same level as your assurance that you are familiar with the game mechanics GÇö a familiarity you immediately disproved by citing GÇ£factsGÇ¥ that were in direct contradiction to said game mechanics.
I've properly analogized the in game situation to false imprisonment. The fact that you don't like it doesn't make it any less true. |

Thaylon Sen
The Istari Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:25:00 -
[1054] - Quote
Zuteh wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec? CONCORD offer a level of deterrent just the same as any law enforcement agency, but as with any police for they're reactive and punitive rather than proactive. If you want your haulage to be safer, bring the guns. If you don't have any guns, sacrifice some of your profit margin and hire someone who has them to escort you. Welcome to New Eden, you just learned a very valuable lesson in being prepared and covering your back.  If CONCORD was to be a deterrent then the ganking character would be thrown in Eve-jail for a few months. Currently it is a puny consequence which the gankers completely mitigate with throw-away fits. IMO this is the reason Eve stagnated and is declining, it drives off fresh blood who can't be arsed with a cesspool of wannabe pirates getting their kicks out of E-tears.
Having played EVE since beta, I just wanted to quote this again as summing up my opinions on the matter. There is an underlying problem here that needs to be addressed, otherwise there will be no new blood to fill the ranks, as long term players slowly fade away due to natural attrition. I'm all for open world PvP (and I'm guilty of being a ganker myself at times), but the simple truth is, the game isn't as new player friendly as it was when I and many other old vets started playing. Something has to change or EVE will fade away to. |

Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
1189
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:25:00 -
[1055] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
TL;DR Causality ************. Accounts may not be used for business purposes. Access to the System and playing EVE is intended for your personal entertainment, enjoyment and recreation, and not for corporate, business, commercial or income-seeking activities.-á |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24296
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:25:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Yawn...just lying over and over again does not an argument make. GǪand that is exactly why you have no argument. Because you have only ever managed to prove that everything you say is a lie.
Quote:Since you have provided not a shred of evidence so far GǪaside from proving everything you say wrong using actual facts GÇö something you have not been able to respond to.
Let's list a few of your lies so far, shall we?
You claim that ganking has increased. You have not been able to provide any supporting evidence. You claim that bumping replicates warp scrambling 100%. This is proven false by simple game mechanics. You claim that you have witnessed this happening. This is proven false by your claim that you have no experience of it. You claim that CONCORD does not respond to illegal restriction of movement. This is proven false by simple game mechanics. You claim that bumping ships out of alignment is a criminal act. This is proven false by simple game mechanics and by multiple dev statements. You claim that CONCORD is a police force. You have not been able to provide any source that says so. You claim that bumping is not consistent with the principle of highsec. This is proven false by dev statement, simple game mechanics, and your abject refusal to actually specify said principles. You claim that you are familiar with the game mechaincs. This is proven false by how you consistently describe them in ways that have no relation whatsoever to how they actually work, and by your inability to spot the relevance of said mechanics when they're quoted for you. You claim that the truth works well for you. This is proven false by your consistent use of lies and fantasies and your dismissal of hard facts.
Quote:And as for the 1.4 number, why don't you ask your fellow poster instead of asking me? Because you tried (and failed) to use it to prove an increase in ganking.
Quote:I've properly analogized the in game situation to false imprisonment. No, you haven't for the simple reason that what the term describes already exists in the game. It is not what you're describing. What you're describing is not false imprisonment by virtue of not being imprisonment to begin with. It is only your proven unfamiliarity with game mechanics that make you repeat this very silly and very obvious error, both in terms of legal jargon and in terms of gameplay.
GǪoh, and the last time you tried to tangle with analogies, you ended up with misrepresentation and a hilarious strawman, so the propriety of your analogising is itself highly questionable. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:28:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Ah, I see we have another fake space lawyer.
Don't have anything else to bolster your argument anymore, so you fall back on the old "appeal to imaginary authority", hmm? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:29:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah, I see we have another fake space lawyer.
Don't have anything else to bolster your argument anymore, so you fall back on the old "appeal to imaginary authority", hmm?
The truth actually works quite well for me. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24296
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:29:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:The truth actually works quite well for me. This is very obviously a lie, since you refuse to accept some very simple truths related to the matter at hand.
GǪin fact, let's add that to the listGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:34:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah, I see we have another fake space lawyer.
Don't have anything else to bolster your argument anymore, so you fall back on the old "appeal to imaginary authority", hmm? The truth actually works quite well for me.
More like a term you looked up on LegalZoom, I imagine.
Hence why you keep repeating it endlessly like it's a magic charm. I thought lawyers were supposed to be good at arguing? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:36:00 -
[1061] - Quote
Quote:Since you have provided not a shred of evidence so far GǪaside from proving everything you say wrong using actual facts GÇö something you have not been able to respond to.
Let's list a few of your lies so far, shall we?
You claim that ganking has increased. You have not been able to provide any supporting evidence. You claim that bumping replicates warp scrambling 100%. This is proven false by simple game mechanics. You claim that you have witnessed this happening. This is proven false by your claim that you have no experience of it. You claim that CONCORD does not respond to illegal restriction of movement. This is proven false by simple game mechanics. You claim that bumping ships out of alignment is a criminal act. This is proven false by simple game mechanics and by multiple dev statements. You claim that CONCORD is a police force. You have not been able to provide any source that says so. You claim that bumping is not consistent with the principle of highsec. This is proven false by dev statement, simple game mechanics, and your abject refusal to actually specify said principles. You claim that you are familiar with the game mechaincs. This is proven false by how you consistently describe them in ways that have no relation whatsoever to how they actually work, and by your inability to spot the relevance of said mechanics when they're quoted for you.
Quote:And as for the 1.4 number, why don't you ask your fellow poster instead of asking me? Because you tried (and failed) to use it to prove an increase in ganking.
Quote:I've properly analogized the in game situation to false imprisonment. No, you haven't for the simple reason that what the term describes already exists in the game. It is not what you're describing. What you're describing is not false imprisonment by virtue of not being imprisonment to begin with. It is only your proven unfamiliarity with game mechanics that make you repeat this very silly and very obvious error, both in terms of legal jargon and in terms of gameplay.
GǪoh, and the last time you tried to tangle with analogies, you ended up with misrepresentation and a hilarious strawman, so the propriety of your analogising is itself highly questionable.[/quote]
One more go with you today....I've kind of reached my lie-busting quota for now.
I gave strong supporting evidence that freighter ganking has increased...the killboard from the 1 guy I gave you nearly exceeds the 1.4 number per day FROM YOUR OWN SIDE. Check out minerbumping.com for more examples. I pointed out that if optimal bumping renders a ship unable to warp, it is functionally equivalent to warp scrambling I did witness it happening, I was not the victim, I was trying to help the victim escape. (The fact that you listed this as a "lie" is truly mortifyingly stupid.) CONCORD fails to respond to bumping between ganks (not sure how this could possibly be a "lie.") I said that it SHOULD be criminal, not that it currently is (another insane example of a "lie.") I think any rational person sees CONCORD as a police force in highsec. I pointed out how absurd it is to not punish bumping between ganks that is equivalent to false imprisonment (you really have to be delusional to not see this.) I am quite familiar with game mechanics, thank you. And not my fault if you don't how analogies work.
Keep up the great work, and have a nice day. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
|

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:38:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah, I see we have another fake space lawyer.
Don't have anything else to bolster your argument anymore, so you fall back on the old "appeal to imaginary authority", hmm? The truth actually works quite well for me. More like a term you looked up on LegalZoom, I imagine. Hence why you keep repeating it endlessly like it's a magic charm. I thought lawyers were supposed to be good at arguing?
Not much "arguing" to be done with trolls just looking to protect their livelihood.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:38:00 -
[1063] - Quote
You claim ganking and bumping are a problem.
Thus far, you have provided no evidence for that, just feelings and anecdotal claims arising from you spending an hour or two in Uedama.
CCP says that ganking and bumping are not problems, you have been linked Dev and GM posts to that effect.
I win. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:41:00 -
[1064] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:You claim ganking and bumping are a problem.
Thus far, you have provided no evidence for that, just feelings and anecdotal claims arising from you spending an hour or two in Uedama.
CCP says that ganking and bumping are not problems, you have been linked Dev and GM posts to that effect.
I win.
Quite the "victory." The fact that CCP recently buffed freighters suggest that they do see a problem. And the fact that CODE has led a massive increase in freighter ganking shows that there is an even bigger problem than before. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:45:00 -
[1065] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:You claim ganking and bumping are a problem.
Thus far, you have provided no evidence for that, just feelings and anecdotal claims arising from you spending an hour or two in Uedama.
CCP says that ganking and bumping are not problems, you have been linked Dev and GM posts to that effect.
I win. Quite the "victory." The fact that CCP recently buffed freighters suggest that they do see a problem. And the fact that CODE has led a massive increase in freighter ganking shows that there is an even bigger problem than before.
They did not buff freighters, that's the best part.
They nerfed them, hence why they're easier to kill now, since if people want their old cargo values back they have to eat a big tank nerf. Clearly, CCP thinks they had too much of a benefit in the HP/Cargo ratio.
And the fact that Code. has been killing more freighters is not a problem. Ships are supposed to die. There is no "maximum" amount of them that are supposed to die.
CCP Falcon has elaborated that quite clearly. If you die to gankers, it's your own fault, and it is not something that they think needs to be "fixed."
There is no getting around that. They are the only authority that matters, and they have said in no uncertain terms that haulers dying is not something that bothers them in the slightest. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1276
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:47:00 -
[1066] - Quote
Ok I'm back from that killboard and the first thing that pops into my head was where you got that 1.4 freighters a day number, since that is supposed to be my reference point. and the second thing I found was cargo expanders are very popular on kills. thirdly, Uedama is not the best place to go in blind and solo. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24296
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:48:00 -
[1067] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:1. I gave strong supporting evidence that freighter ganking has increased...the killboard from the 1 guy I gave you nearly exceeds the 1.4 number per day FROM YOUR OWN SIDE. 2. I pointed out that if optimal bumping renders a ship unable to warp, it is functionally equivalent to warp scrambling 3. I did witness it happening, I was not the victim, I was trying to help the victim escape. 4. CONCORD fails to respond to bumping between ganks (not sure how this could possibly be a "lie.") 5. I said that it SHOULD be criminal, not that it currently is (another insane example of a "lie.") 6. I think any rational person sees CONCORD as a police force in highsec. 7. I pointed out how absurd it is to not punish bumping between ganks that is equivalent to false imprisonment (you really have to be delusional to not see this.) 8. I am quite familiar with game mechanics, thank you. 9. And not my fault if you don't how analogies work.
1. Just one problem: you didn't count the number of freighters ganked, and you provided no historical trend. So there is no evidence for your claim. 2. Is proven false by simple game mechanics, and also proves false any claim of your familiarity with the mechanics. 3. That still doesn't remove the contradiction, and it also proves false any claim of your familiarity with the mechanics since you didn't actually help GÇö you just flailed around impotently, not knowing what to do and why. 4. GǪbut they do respond to illegal restrictions of movement. Your claim otherwise is disproven by simple game mechanics, and your inability to realise this belies your claim of familiarity with the mechanics. 5. No, you have repeatedly said that it is criminal. Claiming otherwise is yet another lie on your part. 6. Irrelevant. They're not. Your claim otherwise is baseless. 7a. Claiming that it is equivalent to GÇ£false imprisonmentGÇ¥ belies any familiarity with the mechanics involved. 7b. Your actual claim does not change GÇö you still say it's inconsistent with the principles of highsec that you refuse to define, and the claim as a whole is proven false by the authority on the matter: the guys who designed highsec. 8. This is yet another lie, as proven by the fact that you do not understand how bumping works, how warp scrambling works, how CONCORd works, or how highsec works. 9. No, but it is your fault when you massively misuse or misinterpret them because you are ignorant of both subjects involved.
Quote:The fact that CCP recently buffed freighters suggest that they do see a problem. And the fact that CODE has led a massive increase in freighter ganking shows that there is an even bigger problem than before. Two problems there: they didn't buff freigthers. In fact, if you go back and look at the threads, you'll see people screaming their heads off about the nerfs included. And you have yet to prove both any GÇ£massive increaseGÇ¥ in freighter ganks, or any kind of previous problem. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:48:00 -
[1068] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Ok I'm back from that killboard and the first thing that pops into my head was where you got that 1.4 freighters a day number, since that is supposed to be my reference point. and the second thing I found was cargo expanders are very popular on kills. thirdly, Uedama is not the best place to go in blind and solo.
The 1.4 number is from Kaauros, and yes some freighter pilots are stupid, but even the ones with proper tank are blowing up, and Uedama is a real hard system to avoid. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:49:00 -
[1069] - Quote
The number I got was from a thread where they referenced the "creation vs. destruction" dev blog.
I don't recall who it was who said it, but when I checked their numbers against (I think it was zKillboard) it checked out. Granted, that was back in FanFest, so it's been a while. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9435
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:49:00 -
[1070] - Quote
At least spell my name correctly. Seven letters is not too much to ask, Belvedere. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:50:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:At least spell my name correctly. Seven letters is not too much to ask, Belvedere.
Find an easier name for Americans to spell, without so many vowels :) |

Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1276
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:54:00 -
[1072] - Quote
I'm also having difficulty sorting out "ganks" against legitmate kills (wardecs, lowsec, etc.) and finding data from anything beyond a few weeks. Also curious if that dev was referring to ganks or kills in general.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9436
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 05:57:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Rowells wrote:I'm also having difficulty sorting out "ganks" against legitmate kills (wardecs, lowsec, etc.) and finding data from anything beyond a few weeks. Also curious if that dev was referring to ganks or kills in general.
When, I think it was Tippia, tried the same thing, he had a similar issue. More than a few freighter deaths do not line up with CONCORD kills.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
523
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:11:00 -
[1074] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity. Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. And pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers (the original topic of this thread) is something that CCP should be aware of, as it considers whether the current game mechanics are having their intended impact on highsec.
False imprisonment? Let's grant your idea for the sake of argument. Bumping constitutes false imprisonment. But in Eve that is not a crime. Therefore Concord does not respond. The world of Eve does not operate according to your ideals of morality. Slavery is legal in a large part of Eve space. Scamming and swindling are legal everywhere. Concord's clear purpose is to provide enough safety in high sec that a certain level of trade goes on at a steady pace. Concord is not concerned with individual survival and has absolutely no involvement with any idea of justice.
The mechanic of bumping is used for far more reasons than helping gankers to destroy freighters. It's useful in all kinds of pvp. It's useful in counteracting isoboxers who run big mining fleets. It's useful in breaking up station games during war decs and in wars of all kinds. It's far too useful to the game to destroy by giving some huge window in which the ship is allowed to warp away in spite of being bumped out of alignment.
Real life definitions of crime don't apply in Eve and all the lawyerly logic in the world won't make it so. I hate ganking as much as anybody but I would never call for it to be taken out of the game because I know perfectly well how much it adds to the game. (Scamming, now that's another subject entirely.)
The new player experience does suck but ganking is far from the only reason for that. Maybe Eve will die because of it, maybe it won't. There's some form of this fight going on in every MMO I know about. Eve may lose a lot of new players but it retains many players for very long periods of time, and convinces them to spend a lot of money on multiple accounts. As long as it does that it will survive.
Concord's proper role is to provide an isk sink. You can impose police-type assumptions as to what Concord does, but there's no validity to your doing so. Concord is about making the ganker pay a price. CCP Falcon's unfortunate comparison of Concord to the police notwithstanding, they bear no relation to a police force in a modern western country.
|

Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
523
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:13:00 -
[1075] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rowells wrote:I'm also having difficulty sorting out "ganks" against legitmate kills (wardecs, lowsec, etc.) and finding data from anything beyond a few weeks. Also curious if that dev was referring to ganks or kills in general.
When, I think it was Tippia, tried the same thing, he had a similar issue. More than a few freighter deaths do not line up with CONCORD kills.
The most common war dec type my corp faced in the last couple of years was by corps who declared war on massive numbers of corps and then hung out in the trade hubs and along trade routes to catch careless players who weren't paying attention to their corps and the wars. I'm sure this would blur the numbers. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24297
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:17:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Rowells wrote:I'm also having difficulty sorting out "ganks" against legitmate kills (wardecs, lowsec, etc.) and finding data from anything beyond a few weeks. Also curious if that dev was referring to ganks or kills in general. What you're looking for is a whole slew of CONCORD losses at a timestamp that's -¦1 minute from a larger loss. It requires you to scan day by day, system by system, rather than, say, just do a group filter. And it is further complicated by the numerous CONCORD losses that show up without a kill preceding them GÇö you end up looking for something that never appears.
So the only ones that can provide any kind of longer-term statistics are the CCP stats wonks. The last time we heard from them, actual gankign was at an all-time low. This is further (less scientifically) reinforced by looking at gank havens such as Perimeter and Sobaseki or Motsu or Aunia.
Conceivably, if you could get direct SQL access to the entire data set, you could conjure up some voodoo queries that grouped same-place/same-time losses and count them, but good luckGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:21:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Ban Bindy wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity. Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. And pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers (the original topic of this thread) is something that CCP should be aware of, as it considers whether the current game mechanics are having their intended impact on highsec. False imprisonment? Let's grant your idea for the sake of argument. Bumping constitutes false imprisonment. But in Eve that is not a crime. Therefore Concord does not respond. The world of Eve does not operate according to your ideals of morality. Slavery is legal in a large part of Eve space. Scamming and swindling are legal everywhere. Concord's clear purpose is to provide enough safety in high sec that a certain level of trade goes on at a steady pace. Concord is not concerned with individual survival and has absolutely no involvement with any idea of justice. The mechanic of bumping is used for far more reasons than helping gankers to destroy freighters. It's useful in all kinds of pvp. It's useful in counteracting isoboxers who run big mining fleets. It's useful in breaking up station games during war decs and in wars of all kinds. It's far too useful to the game to destroy by giving some huge window in which the ship is allowed to warp away in spite of being bumped out of alignment. Real life definitions of crime don't apply in Eve and all the lawyerly logic in the world won't make it so. I hate ganking as much as anybody but I would never call for it to be taken out of the game because I know perfectly well how much it adds to the game. (Scamming, now that's another subject entirely.) The new player experience does suck but ganking is far from the only reason for that. Maybe Eve will die because of it, maybe it won't. There's some form of this fight going on in every MMO I know about. Eve may lose a lot of new players but it retains many players for very long periods of time, and convinces them to spend a lot of money on multiple accounts. As long as it does that it will survive. Concord's proper role is to provide an isk sink. You can impose police-type assumptions as to what Concord does, but there's no validity to your doing so. Concord is about making the ganker pay a price. CCP Falcon's unfortunate comparison of Concord to the police notwithstanding, they bear no relation to a police force in a modern western country.
I actually agree with most of the content in your post, and think you make some good points. I think you are confused by what I suggested. I proposed that the 60 second free escape would apply only after a gank attempt, with CONCORD at the scene. CONCORD, in it role as law enforcement (as stated by CCP Falcon. And they most certainly do meet out punishment for violating the laws of highsec), would not sit idly by and watch a gank victim pinned down and unable to escape. In no conceivable universe would CONCORD fail to intervene and free the victim. I'm actually perfectly fine with suicide ganking, what I don't like is when CONCORD does not do its job, and deal with crime in highsec (and pinning someone down to get ganked is most certainly criminal in nature, whether it relies on pressing F5 or not).
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24299
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:27:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:CONCORD, in it role as law enforcement (as stated by CCP Falcon GǪexcept that CCP falcon never stated anything of the kind.
Quote:would not sit idly by and watch a gank victim pinned down and unable to escape. Good news: they already don't. You're just not familiar enough with the game mechanics involved to know this, nor do you have any actual experience with them, so you go by hear-say instead.
Quote:what I don't like is when CONCORD does not do its job, and deal with crime in highsec Just one problem: CONCORD does do its job, which is to enforce a cost on aggression. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Nitchiu
EVE University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:32:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Ban Bindy wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity. Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. And pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers (the original topic of this thread) is something that CCP should be aware of, as it considers whether the current game mechanics are having their intended impact on highsec. False imprisonment? Let's grant your idea for the sake of argument. Bumping constitutes false imprisonment. But in Eve that is not a crime. Therefore Concord does not respond. The world of Eve does not operate according to your ideals of morality. Slavery is legal in a large part of Eve space. Scamming and swindling are legal everywhere. Concord's clear purpose is to provide enough safety in high sec that a certain level of trade goes on at a steady pace. Concord is not concerned with individual survival and has absolutely no involvement with any idea of justice. The mechanic of bumping is used for far more reasons than helping gankers to destroy freighters. It's useful in all kinds of pvp. It's useful in counteracting isoboxers who run big mining fleets. It's useful in breaking up station games during war decs and in wars of all kinds. It's far too useful to the game to destroy by giving some huge window in which the ship is allowed to warp away in spite of being bumped out of alignment. Real life definitions of crime don't apply in Eve and all the lawyerly logic in the world won't make it so. I hate ganking as much as anybody but I would never call for it to be taken out of the game because I know perfectly well how much it adds to the game. (Scamming, now that's another subject entirely.) The new player experience does suck but ganking is far from the only reason for that. Maybe Eve will die because of it, maybe it won't. There's some form of this fight going on in every MMO I know about. Eve may lose a lot of new players but it retains many players for very long periods of time, and convinces them to spend a lot of money on multiple accounts. As long as it does that it will survive. Concord's proper role is to provide an isk sink. You can impose police-type assumptions as to what Concord does, but there's no validity to your doing so. Concord is about making the ganker pay a price. CCP Falcon's unfortunate comparison of Concord to the police notwithstanding, they bear no relation to a police force in a modern western country. I actually agree with most of the content in your post, and think you make some good points. I think you are confused by what I suggested. I proposed that the 60 second free escape would apply only after a gank attempt, with CONCORD at the scene. CONCORD, in it role as law enforcement (as stated by CCP Falcon. And they most certainly do meet out punishment for violating the laws of highsec), would not sit idly by and watch a gank victim pinned down and unable to escape. In no conceivable universe would CONCORD fail to intervene and free the victim. I'm actually perfectly fine with suicide ganking, what I don't like is when CONCORD does not do its job, and deal with crime in highsec (and pinning someone down to get ganked is most certainly criminal in nature, whether it relies on pressing F5 or not).
So in otherwards if I had a wardec alt I could be totally invulnerable from my WT for 60 seconds? I would just have to gank myself with an alt in a rookie ship |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:35:00 -
[1080] - Quote
Nitchiu wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Ban Bindy wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I just don't understand hyow people can be this weak-kneed in a video game. I mean, look at these people finding any excuse to claim that something is so bad the developers need to intervene to help them.
Did it not ever occur to them that the counter to bumping machs isfriends in smaller ships to bump the machs off course enough to let you warp? I'll bet real life money that these people complaining haven't even tried any solutions, just ran straight to "CCP help me" mode.
And that's stupid. CCP has said they won't help you. CCP designed the game to be harsh and THEN TELLS YOU they did that. Arguing on a forum (which galvanizes the opposition to the dumbing down you people seem to want) is counter-productive. And yet you persist.
Figuring things out, fighting back, outsmarting the people trying to hurt you, these thigns are what this game is about. If you don't want to play a game, then don't, but don't get made at the game for your lack of will or creativity. Expecting CONCORD to respond to false imprisonment (a crime) in highsec does not constitute crying to CCP. It is simply requesting that the game mechanics be updated so that CONCORD performs its proper role. And pointing out that the combination of lack of real consequences for ganking, as well as the exploitation of bumping, is leading to a significant increase in ganks on haulers (the original topic of this thread) is something that CCP should be aware of, as it considers whether the current game mechanics are having their intended impact on highsec. False imprisonment? Let's grant your idea for the sake of argument. Bumping constitutes false imprisonment. But in Eve that is not a crime. Therefore Concord does not respond. The world of Eve does not operate according to your ideals of morality. Slavery is legal in a large part of Eve space. Scamming and swindling are legal everywhere. Concord's clear purpose is to provide enough safety in high sec that a certain level of trade goes on at a steady pace. Concord is not concerned with individual survival and has absolutely no involvement with any idea of justice. The mechanic of bumping is used for far more reasons than helping gankers to destroy freighters. It's useful in all kinds of pvp. It's useful in counteracting isoboxers who run big mining fleets. It's useful in breaking up station games during war decs and in wars of all kinds. It's far too useful to the game to destroy by giving some huge window in which the ship is allowed to warp away in spite of being bumped out of alignment. Real life definitions of crime don't apply in Eve and all the lawyerly logic in the world won't make it so. I hate ganking as much as anybody but I would never call for it to be taken out of the game because I know perfectly well how much it adds to the game. (Scamming, now that's another subject entirely.) The new player experience does suck but ganking is far from the only reason for that. Maybe Eve will die because of it, maybe it won't. There's some form of this fight going on in every MMO I know about. Eve may lose a lot of new players but it retains many players for very long periods of time, and convinces them to spend a lot of money on multiple accounts. As long as it does that it will survive. Concord's proper role is to provide an isk sink. You can impose police-type assumptions as to what Concord does, but there's no validity to your doing so. Concord is about making the ganker pay a price. CCP Falcon's unfortunate comparison of Concord to the police notwithstanding, they bear no relation to a police force in a modern western country. I actually agree with most of the content in your post, and think you make some good points. I think you are confused by what I suggested. I proposed that the 60 second free escape would apply only after a gank attempt, with CONCORD at the scene. CONCORD, in it role as law enforcement (as stated by CCP Falcon. And they most certainly do meet out punishment for violating the laws of highsec), would not sit idly by and watch a gank victim pinned down and unable to escape. In no conceivable universe would CONCORD fail to intervene and free the victim. I'm actually perfectly fine with suicide ganking, what I don't like is when CONCORD does not do its job, and deal with crime in highsec (and pinning someone down to get ganked is most certainly criminal in nature, whether it relies on pressing F5 or not). So in otherwards if I had a wardec alt I could be totally invulnerable from my WT for 60 seconds? I would just have to gank myself with an alt in a rookie ship
No, you would be immune from bumping.....you could still be shot/scrammed/whatever else....just not bumped......Not sure how this is any different than shooting yourself with an alt to draw CONCORD and make it hard for gankers to kill you (and for the record I oppose alts and think everyone should be restricted to a single account, which is what I have). |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
24300
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:40:00 -
[1081] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:No, you would be immune from bumping.....you could still be shot/scrammed/whatever else....just not bumped......Not sure how this is any different than shooting yourself with an alt to draw CONCORD and make it hard for gankers to kill you (and for the record I oppose alts and think everyone should be restricted to a single account, which is what I have). And the fundamental question remains: what on earth makes you think that it's worth breaking the physics engine just to solve a problem that doesn't even exist? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |

Slicr
29
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:46:00 -
[1082] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
Nice to see you put it as your opinion.
I read what you wrote and hope to heck no new players read it - you purposely trying to tank the game? lol I believe in being Pro-Active as Opposed to Reactive. Reactive tends to be more costly in time and money.
|

Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:48:00 -
[1083] - Quote
In Eve we have bombs, lasers, missiles and stuffs that explode...but when two ships collide they bounce off of each other like they are made of Non-Expanding Recreational Foam. Talk about over looking the small details. |

Slicr
29
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:48:00 -
[1084] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:No, you would be immune from bumping.....you could still be shot/scrammed/whatever else....just not bumped......Not sure how this is any different than shooting yourself with an alt to draw CONCORD and make it hard for gankers to kill you (and for the record I oppose alts and think everyone should be restricted to a single account, which is what I have). And the fundamental question remains: what on earth makes you think that it's worth breaking the physics engine just to solve a problem that doesn't even exist?
Yes those GO TO statements are not to be messed with  I believe in being Pro-Active as Opposed to Reactive. Reactive tends to be more costly in time and money.
|

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
9437
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 06:52:00 -
[1085] - Quote
Slicr wrote:Tippia wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:No, you would be immune from bumping.....you could still be shot/scrammed/whatever else....just not bumped......Not sure how this is any different than shooting yourself with an alt to draw CONCORD and make it hard for gankers to kill you (and for the record I oppose alts and think everyone should be restricted to a single account, which is what I have). And the fundamental question remains: what on earth makes you think that it's worth breaking the physics engine just to solve a problem that doesn't even exist? Yes those GO TO STATEMENTS are not to be messed with 
Hey, idk about anyone here, but I sure don't know how to recode a decade old underwater physics engine press ganged into service as a space mmo and hotfixed with five years of largely undocumented code.
If anyone does, by all means apply to CCP and solve all their problems. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |

Christopher AET
hirr Northern Coalition.
788
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 07:58:00 -
[1086] - Quote
I have said it before. If you don't like the rules of hisec, leave hisec. Simples! I drain ducks of their moisture for sustenance. |

Lady Areola Fappington
2168
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 08:22:00 -
[1087] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Hey, idk about anyone here, but I sure don't know how to recode a decade old underwater physics engine press ganged into service as a space mmo and hotfixed with five years of largely undocumented code.
If anyone does, by all means apply to CCP and solve all their problems.
Aspects of Dunning-Kruger, it's always easy to do when you don't have a clue how to do it yourself.
Also, here's the cheat-sheet answer for understanding CCP's decisions. Their entire design philosophy is based on "choose the option that gives the players the most opportunities to interact (by interact we mean conflict)."
Hence why they see no desperate need to "fix" bumping. Bumping causes player interaction (conflict). Player interaction (conflict) is good. Removing bumping would remove a source of player interaction (conflict). Removing bumping is bad. Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name. The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo. Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1271
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 08:22:00 -
[1088] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience.
My god that post... Very nice piece indeed, I need to keep that around for future uses :D Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|

Damon Messer
TheWalkingDead7
52
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 08:23:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Slicr wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:Try again. Don't need to buddy, what I said is fact. Sorry if you don't agree.  This is the ROLE I wish to see CCP in. Stand your Ground, You handle the game aspect and let the players run as they should in a Sandbox game. Whether we kick the castle down or build it, it's up to us. I am so happy finally seeing CCP and a very respect Dev ontop of that taking a Solid stance for once. Actually the last few "releases" I have seen them stand their ground and I love it. Start dealing with everyone and not Catering to the Tearfilled Entitled. Okay, so what follows is entirely my personal opinion. It's not a case of not "catering to the tearfilled entitled", it's a case of us staying true to the core of what EVE was built on. Some of the people complaining in this thread have valid points about the fact that they don't feel safe. Simple fact of the matter is, that you're not suppose to feel safe in New Eden. Eve is not a game for the faint hearted. It's a game that will chew you up and spit you out in the blink of an eye if you even think about letting your guard down or becoming complacent. While every other MMO starts off with an intro that tells you you're going to be the savior of the realm, holds your hand, protects you, nurtures your development and ultimately guides you to your destiny as a hero along with several other million players who've had the exact same experience, EVE assaults you from the second you begin to play after you create a character, spitting you out into a universe that under the surface, is so complex that it's enough to make your head explode. The entire design is based around being harsh, vicious, relentless, hostile and cold. It's about action and reaction, and the story that unfolds as you experience these two things. True, we're working hard to lower the bar of entry so that more players can enjoy EVE and can get into the game. Our NPE (New Player Experience) is challenging, and we're trying to improve it to better prepare rookies for what lies out there, but when you start to play eve, you'll always start out as the little fish in the big pond. The only way to grow is to voraciously consume what's around you, and its your choice whether that happens to be New Eden's abundant natural resources, or the other people who're also fighting their way to the top. EVE is a playing experience like no other, where every action or reaction resonates through a single universe and is felt by players from all corners of the word. There are no shards here, no mirror universes, no instances and very few rules. If you stumble across something valuable, then chances are someone else already knows where you are, or is working their way toward you and you better be prepared to fight for what you've discovered. EVE will test you from the outset, from the very second you undock and glimpse the stars, and will take pleasure from sorting those who can survive from those who'd rather curl up and perish. EVE will let you fight until you collapse, then let you struggle to your feet, exhausted from the effort. Then when you can see the light at the end of the tunnel it'll kick you flat on your ass in the mud again and ask you why you deserve to be standing. It'll test you against every other individual playing at some point or another, and it'll ask for answers. Give it an answer and maybe it'll let you up again, long enough to gather your thoughts. After a few more steps you're on the ground again and it's asking more questions. EVE is designed to be harsh, it's designed to be challenging, and it's designed to be so deep and complex that it should fascinate and terrify you at the same time. Corporation, Alliances and coalitions of tens of thousands have risen and fallen on these basic principles, and every one of those thousands of people has their own unique story to tell about how it affected them and what they experienced. That's the beauty of EVE. Action and reaction. Emergence. Welcome to the most frightening virtual playground you'll ever experience. Nice to see you put it as your opinion. I read what you wrote and hope to heck no new players read it - you purposely trying to tank the game? lol
That's what actually got me to sub, the shear grittiness of EVE. If other new players don't like it, WoWland is that way --->>> |

Slick Entry
Smearing Myself With Jam
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 08:40:00 -
[1090] - Quote
Christopher AET wrote:Simples!
The perfect collective noun for people who say that. |

TharOkha
0asis Group
930
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:28:00 -
[1091] - Quote
(Double post) CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5440
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:28:00 -
[1092] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:I don't see how intelligently responding to false imprisonment and escorting a victim to safety "fundamentally changes what CONCORD is for."
CONCORD is an exclusively punitive mechanic. They punish offenders, that is their entire role.
They do not provide victim's services. That's what Pend is for.
And again, False Imprisonment isn't a crime in EVE. Activating an offensive module on an illegal target is the *only* Criminal Act in EVE.
Quote: 1) I gave strong supporting evidence that freighter ganking has increased...the killboard from the 1 guy I gave you nearly exceeds the 1.4 number per day FROM YOUR OWN SIDE. Check out minerbumping.com for more examples. 2) I pointed out that if optimal bumping renders a ship unable to warp, it is functionally equivalent to warp scrambling 3) I did witness it happening, I was not the victim, I was trying to help the victim escape. (The fact that you listed this as a "lie" is truly mortifyingly stupid.) 4) CONCORD fails to respond to bumping between ganks (not sure how this could possibly be a "lie.") 5) I said that it SHOULD be criminal, not that it currently is (another insane example of a "lie.") 6) I think any rational person sees CONCORD as a police force in highsec. 7) I pointed out how absurd it is to not punish bumping between ganks that is equivalent to false imprisonment (you really have to be delusional to not see this.) 8) I am quite familiar with game mechanics, thank you. And not my fault if you don't how analogies work.
9) Keep up the great work, and have a nice day. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
*numbering added for clarity.
1) You claimed that there was an increase in ganking. Evidence of that would consist of showing a trend. And since travel volume isn't a constant, a trend in absolute numbers is not useful evidence for you. 2) Great, then since bumping does not render a ship unable to warp, it is not in any way equivalent to warp scrambling, rendering everything that follows moot. But let's press on anyway. 3) If you were unable to do so, either you or the victim were incompetent or ignorant of the mechanics available. 4) CONCORD also fails to respond to every other non-criminal action 5) Why should bumping be a Criminal Action in EVE? 6) Except the Devs. And anyone who knows how the game mechanics work. And anyone familiar with a police force (I don't know about you, but summary execution isn't part of the PD's role in my town). 7) False Imprisonment isn't a crime in EVE. The only criminal act in EVE is activating an offensive module against a target you're not legally allowed to shoot. You claim to be a lawyer, how do you think you'd do citing Swedish precedent in a Kentucky court? 8) Clearly, you're not, and it has nothing to do with your analogies.
9) You took some sort of debate class in Lawyer training school, right? Can you spot the informal fallacy you commit each time you drop that quote? I'll give you a list of your options. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

TharOkha
0asis Group
930
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:34:00 -
[1093] - Quote
My god.. Even if I LOL on CODE for their pity venture contest, newbies hunt and latest chicken-run from AT, i agree with CCP Falcon on this.
most of the gankers have -10.00 sec status - they can be freely attacked anywhere in hisec, even with npc police support
Most of the ganks occurs in 0.5 or 0.6 bottleneck systems like Uedama, Niarja, Madimire... Everybody knows where they operate so why not to fit catalyst or trasher and hunt for them and protect "innocent haulers"?
Gankers are really easy prey, They usually fly untanked glass canons. Simple cheap Alpha Trasher will tore them to shreds.+ you can wh*re on Concord Killmails
And yet, i see so little anti-gankers in those systems (Uedama, Niarja etc). CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell |

Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2601
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:41:00 -
[1094] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:And yet, i see so little anti-gankers in those systems (Uedama, Niarja etc).
Because being there, and actively doing something about "the bad guys" means that they have to put in ~effort~. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12912
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 09:43:00 -
[1095] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:TharOkha wrote:And yet, i see so little anti-gankers in those systems (Uedama, Niarja etc). Because being there, and actively doing something about "the bad guys" means that they have to put in ~effort~.
They cant even bother themselves to tank their ****. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
5440
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:05:00 -
[1096] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Velicitia wrote:TharOkha wrote:And yet, i see so little anti-gankers in those systems (Uedama, Niarja etc). Because being there, and actively doing something about "the bad guys" means that they have to put in ~effort~. They cant even bother themselves to tank their ****.
Worse, they can't even bother to leave their ships unfit.
[Obelisk, Better Fit than Most Gank Targets]
[Empty Low Slot] [Empty Low Slot] [Empty Low Slot] "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon |

Fr3akwave
Shattered Sword
36
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:08:00 -
[1097] - Quote
Isn't this thread ripe for closing?
I mean, for the last 30 pages this whole discussion is circling around OP insisting that bumping to prevent a victim from warping for an extended period of time is a crime, while in reality it isn't. Any attempts to make that clear to him are by now being responded to with expressions like "delusioned" or "insane".
I mean, this can go on forever, but the fact are bumping is not illegal, does not prevent you from warping, and CONCORD is not a police force, and this guy wont accept it for the next 200 pages.
So, what's the point in continuing? |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
12914
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:13:00 -
[1098] - Quote
Fr3akwave wrote:Isn't this thread ripe for closing?
I mean, for the last 30 pages this whole discussion is circling around OP insisting that bumping to prevent a victim from warping for an extended period of time is a crime, while in reality it isn't. Any attempts to make that clear to him are by now being responded to with expressions like "delusioned" or "insane".
I mean, this can go on forever, but the fact are bumping is not illegal, does not prevent you from warping, and CONCORD is not a police force, and this guy wont accept it for the next 200 pages.
So, what's the point in continuing?
Strike this thread down and another will replace it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|

CCP Falcon
8779

|
Posted - 2014.09.01 10:17:00 -
[1099] - Quote
Fr3akwave wrote:Isn't this thread ripe for closing?
I mean, for the last 30 pages this whole discussion is circling around OP insisting that bumping to prevent a victim from warping for an extended period of time is a crime, while in reality it isn't. Any attempts to make that clear to him are by now being responded to with expressions like "delusioned" or "insane".
I mean, this can go on forever, but the fact are bumping is not illegal, does not prevent you from warping, and CONCORD is not a police force, and this guy wont accept it for the next 200 pages.
So, what's the point in continuing?
Yes, this thread is ripe for closing, because it's gone completely off topic now.
Locked.
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3 |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: [one page] |