EVE Search - Suspect timers for stealing loot

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

Suspect timers for stealing loot

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11945	Posted - 2015.02.28 08:05:10 - [31] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: I wasn't aware the bumping machariels and loot scooping haulers were -10. You don't need to shoot those in the first place. Use a webbing alt and you've gotten past them. Now, if you're actually willing to shoot things, you might as well shoot the freighter wrecks for better effect. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 656	Posted - 2015.03.02 14:13:28 - [32] - Quote I think his point was that if you gank a ganker then the security status penalty should not apply to the same degree, perhaps a sliding scale on the security scale would be fair and equitable. It does seem however that CCP has issues in looking at some of its criminalisation mechanics which defy logic, though looking at where I live it seems that real life is actually getting closer and closer to Eve! Ella's Snack bar
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2039	Posted - 2015.03.02 17:33:52 - [33] - Quote I'm struggling to see why getting a larger sec status hit for shooting someone who has shot more NPCs than someone else is either fair or equitable to anyone. Sec status is not a real measure of anything.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 659	Posted - 2015.03.02 21:38:58 - [34] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: I'm struggling to see why getting a larger sec status hit for shooting someone who has shot more NPCs than someone else is either fair or equitable to anyone. Sec status is not a real measure of anything. I think you misunderstood what I was suggesting on what I think he said, personally I think its just a better idea to train a Gank alt, though using ones main is also fun, if only that Macherial had not fitted a DCU, so shot the next best thing... Ella's Snack bar
Asia Leigh Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 245	Posted - 2015.03.02 22:03:38 - [35] - Quote 4 solutions to your problem. 1. Suicide gank their orca, DST /or their freighter. 2. Shoot their transfer ships that go suspect when they loot. While you may not get any loot, you can make it a pain in the ass for them to operate efficiently and you may get lucky. 3. Grab whatever loot you can and GTFO before you get shot. 4. Suicide gank the wreck itself and deny the loot all-together. Stop being lazy and stop trying to get CCP to do your work for you, and use the tools you have at your disposal to do what you want to try and accomplish. `Apply the damn rules equally >.>`
Minmatar Citizen160812 The LGBT Last Supper 756	Posted - 2015.03.02 23:21:12 - [36] - Quote Asia Leigh wrote: 4 solutions to your problem. 1. Suicide gank their orca, DST /or their freighter. 2. Shoot their transfer ships that go suspect when they loot. While you may not get any loot, you can make it a pain in the ass for them to operate efficiently and you may get lucky. 3. Grab whatever loot you can and GTFO before you get shot. 4. Suicide gank the wreck itself and deny the loot all-together. Stop being lazy and stop trying to get CCP to do your work for you, and use the tools you have at your disposal to do what you want to try and accomplish. Slow down there Speed Racer. That all requires effort and learning.
Renegade Heart Micro N2 425	Posted - 2015.03.02 23:53:58 - [37] - Quote Ima Wreckyou wrote: Renegade Heart wrote: Ima Wreckyou wrote: So the AG dudes are once again too bad to play the game and demand changes from CCP. What a surprise. All of them? Lol Yes They also look the same, all of them Ridiculous trolls.
Talos Antilles Red Frog Freight Red-Frog 1	Posted - 2015.03.03 05:32:39 - [38] - Quote Elana Apgar wrote: People taking or handling the stolen loot should all go suspect. Do you have any clue what this would do to the game code and databases? Not only would items have the ITEM ID that tells what they are, but they would have a unique identifier IN ADDITION TO the ITEM ID. Each and every singular item would have to exist as a unique record (see: IUID, item unique identification). The result is an exponential growth in server databases and data caches on clients. Stacking items? Irrevocably broken, without MORE code to assign ANOTHER identifier for the group of items. More database records, larger data caches. I understand your frustration, but in a game that is far more dynamic in terms of asset accountability than any RL business in existence (creation, transfer, destruction), it is way beyond feasible to implement. I was a project manager for an effort to incorporate IUID into a DoD logistics system, and it was a nightmare - and that was on a scale far smaller than the logistics involved in EVE.
Talos Antilles Red Frog Freight Red-Frog 1	Posted - 2015.03.03 05:42:13 - [39] - Quote Futt Isimazu wrote: OP's idea, assuming no LEGACYCODE problems, is simple. Stolen items have a 'stolen' tag until the ship containing them docks in a station. Anyone who picks up an item with a 'stolen' tag is rendered suspect. How do you differentiate between a stolen item and a legally-owned item in the same container (cargo hold, fleet hangar, station bay, freight container) when they have the same item id, and that is the only identifier they have? Not so simple.
Chenguang Hucel-Ge Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate 7	Posted - 2015.03.03 08:55:41 - [40] - Quote Talos Antilles wrote: Futt Isimazu wrote: OP's idea, assuming no LEGACYCODE problems, is simple. Stolen items have a 'stolen' tag until the ship containing them docks in a station. Anyone who picks up an item with a 'stolen' tag is rendered suspect. How do you differentiate between a stolen item and a legally-owned item in the same container (cargo hold, fleet hangar, station bay, freight container) when they have the same item id, and that is the only identifier they have? Not so simple. In terms of spaceships, we can easily pass these flags to ALL items of the same id, nullifying them as fast as any suspect gets killed, timer running out or reaching safety (Either POS shield or station). It worked in Morrowind, kinda, but there was problem that ownership flags were permanent. Also, the problem with someone else's fleet hangar is that there is no even small delay between steal and safety. You just throw stolen directly in fleet hangar, not holding it even for 1 ms. Add 2 seconds to it - and you've got something that remotely looks like fair game.

Avaelica Kuershin 14	Posted - 2015.03.03 09:45:32 - [41] - Quote Elana Apgar wrote: The frigates went suspect but the pilot of the DST and the Charon did not. The frigates were able to dump the loot instantly so while we killed them too, there were no real repercussions for them (the gankers) because they never lost the loot at all. So if ..., bumping without aggression is allowed, . Perhaps the answer was there all the time.
Elana Apgar DarkMatter-Industries Upholders 19	Posted - 2015.03.03 17:02:05 - [42] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Demerius Xenocratus wrote: I wasn't aware the bumping machariels and loot scooping haulers were -10. You don't need to shoot those in the first place. Use a webbing alt and you've gotten past them. Now, if you're actually willing to shoot things, you might as well shoot the freighter wrecks for better effect. The problem with shooting wrecks is that it makes you criminal and the owner of the wreck gets a killright on you- something that doesn't happen if you steal the wreck. Something else kinda broken when you think about it...
Aqriue Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 738	Posted - 2015.03.03 17:34:23 - [43] - Quote OP has silly whine, if someone is looting a wreck that was freighter ganked by a fleet (CODE for example) then one could just as well turn off the safety, assemble your own fleet, wait for the wreck to disseapper, wait for the freighter to align and gank the freighter that was carrying the loot from the first freighter. Basicly 1. Freighter AFK in 2. Gank fleet shows up 3. Pilots use disposable ships to loot, carry to another freighter 4. ???? 5. PROFIT! You now repeat step 2 and 3 by warping your own fleet in on top of the gank fleet, bump the freighter with your own mach, loot with your own disposable ships, and loot with another freighter there by giving the first fleet the chance to show back up unless you are very quick. To much to understand? tldr: When in Rome, do as the EVE do. Neut Mach Bump, Gank, Neut loot, Move to Neut Freighter, and do what they did while losing your own sec status. Sandbox is a poor term to describe a game, when basically you can only be the bad guy to win. Forget about losing to CONCORD, EVE is just a poor simulator of combat with the safety turned off and a case study of seeing how much people are willing to risk to win.
Paranoid Loyd 4004	Posted - 2015.03.03 17:39:11 - [44] - Quote Elana Apgar wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Demerius Xenocratus wrote: I wasn't aware the bumping machariels and loot scooping haulers were -10. You don't need to shoot those in the first place. Use a webbing alt and you've gotten past them. Now, if you're actually willing to shoot things, you might as well shoot the freighter wrecks for better effect. The problem with shooting wrecks is that it makes you criminal and the owner of the wreck gets a killright on you- something that doesn't happen if you steal the wreck. Something else kinda broken when you think about it... If you don't want to get dirty, don't play in the dirt. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!!!
Talos Antilles Red Frog Freight Red-Frog 3	Posted - 2015.03.04 08:21:27 - [45] - Quote Chenguang Hucel-Ge wrote: Talos Antilles wrote: Futt Isimazu wrote: OP's idea, assuming no LEGACYCODE problems, is simple. Stolen items have a 'stolen' tag until the ship containing them docks in a station. Anyone who picks up an item with a 'stolen' tag is rendered suspect. How do you differentiate between a stolen item and a legally-owned item in the same container (cargo hold, fleet hangar, station bay, freight container) when they have the same item id, and that is the only identifier they have? Not so simple. In terms of spaceships, we can easily pass these flags to ALL items of the same id, nullifying them as fast as any suspect gets killed, timer running out or reaching safety (Either POS shield or station). It worked in Morrowind, kinda, but there was problem that ownership flags were permanent. Also, the problem with someone else's fleet hangar is that there is no even small delay between steal and safety. You just throw stolen directly in fleet hangar, not holding it even for 1 ms. Add 2 seconds to it - and you've got something that remotely looks like fair game. I have a widget, then stole a widget, so now they're both stolen. Oh. Kay.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 668	Posted - 2015.03.04 10:33:15 - [46] - Quote Well might as well talk about it here. So I thought lets join in on the fun, so I am sitting next to a freighter wreck thinking yay I can shoot whoever sccops the loot, I am next to a transport ship and a freighter, in comes noob ship goes suspect, I ignore it as I think diversion, all the loot from the wreck disappears and I sit there going WTF. So when I came across this thread the penny dropped, Consequences indeed, Eve is such a cold hard difficult place, are you kidding me? OK as mechanics go I have to accept that this one cannot be changed, the ways it can be used to grief mean you cannot do it any other way and service fleet mates, but there you go, not so hard and dark is it for Mr Gankers scooping alts is it. So while a friend and I were chewing this over we started talking about Kaarous and his thing about bling fitted mission ships running around in total safety in hisec comment that he loves to throw around and we saw a loss by a mission killer in Osmon where the person involved had his safety set to red instead of orange. Scratch one pimp fitted Stratios, what is amusing is that it was a bling fitted mission killer that was totally safe because you know mission boats in the main do not have points, so there you go Kaarous a bling fitted ship that is normally sate in hisec. If only he had set his safety to orange... We thought you would like the irony on that loss, just check Osmon for it. This is not to have a go at the player concerned, we all make mistakes, but I love it that the safety feature is important when it comes to criminal activities... Especially funny as we had the main CODE player in Osmon teling him to set his safety to orange next time. Ella's Snack bar
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 430	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:22:08 - [47] - Quote Aqriue wrote: OP has silly whine, if someone is looting a wreck that was freighter ganked by a fleet (CODE for example) then one could just as well turn off the safety, assemble your own fleet, wait for the wreck to disseapper, wait for the freighter to align and gank the freighter that was carrying the loot from the first freighter. Basicly 1. Freighter AFK in 2. Gank fleet shows up 3. Pilots use disposable ships to loot, carry to another freighter 4. ???? 5. PROFIT! You now repeat step 2 and 3 by warping your own fleet in on top of the gank fleet, bump the freighter with your own mach, loot with your own disposable ships, and loot with another freighter there by giving the first fleet the chance to show back up unless you are very quick. To much to understand? tldr: When in Rome, do as the EVE do. Neut Mach Bump, Gank, Neut loot, Move to Neut Freighter, and do what they did while losing your own sec status. Sandbox is a poor term to describe a game, when basically you can only be the bad guy to win. Forget about losing to CONCORD, EVE is just a poor simulator of combat with the safety turned off and a case study of seeing how much people are willing to risk to win. Don't buy it. You are asking anti-criminals to become criminals to counter criminals. CONCORD should not be penalizing players that are attempting to halt thieves carrying stolen loot. Anti-piracy is a legitimate play style. Game mechanics should support it. The intent of the suspect mechanic is an important consideration here. It flags your ship for open combat to add risk to the process of thievery. Swapping out that risk for the sacrifice of a cheap T1 hauler expels the purpose behind the suspect flag - giving players the ability to stop thieves through legally sanctioned combat. ~ Bookmarks in overview ~ Fleet improvements
Destiny Corrupted Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company 2816	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:26:59 - [48] - Quote The idea is entirely untenable from a coding perspective anyway. And even if by some miracle it was implemented and properly worked, despite the thousands of various considerations that would have to be accounted for, it would merely force gankers to use even more alts than they do today. Now, ganking operations will also need to have protection ships on standby in case anyone wants to aggro the final carrier, and they'll have enough of them present to deter any form of interference. This will, of course, require increased PLEX expenditures in order to fuel the extra accounts, which will in turn make gankers gank more in order to compensate for the increased costs. So at the end of the day, the intended change will have the exact opposite effect of the intended one, as is par for the course for every "anti-sociopath" idea ever proposed by carebears and/or implemented by CCP. I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here: https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 430	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:49:56 - [49] - Quote Destiny Corrupted wrote: The idea is entirely untenable from a coding perspective anyway. I imagine this to be the case. Quote: And even if by some miracle it was implemented and properly worked, despite the thousands of various considerations that would have to be accounted for, it would merely force gankers to use even more alts than they do today. Why would it force them to do that? It's trivially easy to get away with stolen loot if you understand how to fit and pilot a Deep Space Transport. Only a well piloted HIC can stop you. It would serve as more of a litmus test. The looters that die will be like the anti-tanked Retriever in a 0.5. Smart looters and smart miners don't die unless faced with very competent pilots. Dumb ones do and should. I also think you are over estimating how many pilots are willing to roll with an army of alts. Gankers would have more target availability if they rolled with many alts yet most have only 1 or 2 gank characters. Quote: Now, ganking operations will also need to have protection ships on standby in case anyone wants to aggro the final carrier, and they'll have enough of them present to deter any form of interference. They would have to be gank ships. Only the suspect in the industrial has a limited engagement. Gankers would need to muster up enough gank ships to kill buffer tanked combat vessels at a time when all the pilots involved in the freighter gank are already criminally flagged. They may land a kill or two on pilots with bad spacial awareness but not enough to stop a group of anti-pirates. If talking logi keep in mind the logi would turn suspect and could be alpha'd off the field. I for one would look forward to the battle of logistics ships trying to keep a suspect looter alive while anti-pirates try to alpha them off grid. This sounds wonderful to me, I am not sure why anyone would think of this as a bad thing. Quote: This will, of course, require increased PLEX expenditures in order to fuel the extra accounts, which will in turn make gankers gank more in order to compensate for the increased costs. The extra accounts won't happen and ganking is not how most players are making their profit. If we accept your statement though, more ganking and more revenue for CCP. Sounds good. Quote: So at the end of the day, the intended change will have the exact opposite effect of the intended one The intended change is to allow players to shoot at anyone who is in possession of the stolen loot until the loot is docked up. How will this have the opposite effect? ~ Bookmarks in overview ~ Fleet improvements
Chenguang Hucel-Ge Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate 8	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:53:39 - [50] - Quote Talos Antilles wrote: I have a widget, then stole a widget, so now they're both stolen. Oh. Kay. Yes, game mechanics sound stupid sometimes, but that's how it worked in TESIII. And, in fact, that how every law enforcement work. But then you just ignored full list of terms under which these flags are voided. I repeat: Time lapse, reaching station, reaching POS shield, surviving a ship going pop.

Destiny Corrupted Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company 2816	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:04:49 - [51] - Quote McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote: Why would it force them to do that? It's trivially easy to get away with stolen loot if you understand how to fit and pilot a Deep Space Transport. Only a well piloted HIC can stop you. It would serve as more of a litmus test. The looters that die will be like the anti-tanked Retriever in a 0.5. Smart looters and smart miners don't die unless faced with very competent pilots. Dumb ones do and should. I also think you are over estimating how many pilots are willing to roll with an army of alts. Gankers would have more target availability if they rolled with many alts yet most have only 1 or 2 gank characters. To ensure that the loot doesn't get counter-scooped while it's being worked on, if necessary. McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote: They would have to be gank ships. Only the suspect in the industrial has a limited engagement. Gankers would need to muster up enough gank ships to kill buffer tanked combat vessels at a time when all the pilots involved in the freighter gank are already criminally flagged. They may land a kill or two on pilots with bad spacial awareness but not enough to stop a group of anti-pirates. If talking logi keep in mind the logi would turn suspect and could be alpha'd off the field. I for one would look forward to the battle of logistics ships trying to keep a suspect looter alive while anti-pirates try to alpha them off grid. I am not sure why anyone would think of this as a bad thing. If there's interference, it could result in an expanded chain of suspect flags and limited engagements. Suppose one player repairs the hauler being attacked by the "anti-pirate" (these don't exist, by the way). Now the anti-pirate has to take out that player in order to damage the hauler. If he attacks him, that player will in turn be repaired by a team of friendly Guardians or something. Now the anti-pirate will need to deal with the Guardians as well. There could also be extra bumpers, suicide ECM boats, and other stuff. It would all work out similarly to the way that suspect flag-baiting works out today, and trust me, it almost never works out in favor of the white knights. McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote: I don't think that will happen but if so, more ganking and more revenue for CCP. Sounds good. Even if we're going to consider the proliferation of alt usage (as opposed to an increasing amount of unique players) as a good thing, there's also the matter of placing all of that burden on one specific player demographic, which leads to: McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote: Quote: So at the end of the day, the intended change will have the exact opposite effect of the intended one The intended change is to allow players to shoot at anyone who is in possession of the stolen loot until the loot is docked up. How will this have the opposite effect? Because gankers will need to gank more in order to compensate for the newly-increased costs of ganking. Gankers ganking more is the opposite of the effect sought by the OP as a consequence of the idea being proposed. The OP wants less ganking, not more; if the OP's idea is implemented, the opposite will happen. I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here: https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Sibyyl Gallente Federation 23615	Posted - 2015.03.04 15:53:24 - [52] - Quote What is the problem we are trying to solve? People not shooting the wreck or failing to shoot the first looter on the scene? Rush to danger, wind up nowhere Sabriz for CSM go go go
Paranoid Loyd 4011	Posted - 2015.03.04 16:28:38 - [53] - Quote Sibyyl wrote: What is the problem we are trying to solve? People not shooting the wreck or failing to shoot the first looter on the scene? White knights are mad they can't easily kill people when they are scooping the loot. The obvious solution is to use the same tactics the "bad" people use but they are above that so they want the mechanics changed. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!!!
Zealous Miner 16	Posted - 2015.03.04 16:37:47 - [54] - Quote If you want to beat the "bad guys" then you're going to have to put in just as much work as they do. Also, as anti-gankers in this game you are essentially vigilantes. Vigilantes carry out their own efforts without legal authority and aren't exactly famous for doing so in the exact manner the law prescribes. Just something to keep in mind. So, either be quicker on the draw or be prepared to fight dirty if it comes down to it. Just like real vigilante groups. I voted for Sabriz Adoudel for CSM10. You should too. www.minerbumping.com
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1457	Posted - 2015.03.04 17:22:24 - [55] - Quote All kidding aside, having a suspect flag transfer from a ship scooping the loot to a ship with a fleet hangar storing it is a monumentally horrible idea from the standpoint of the miner/hauler/anti-ganking community. Why? Well, imagine that you're someone who enjoys a good AWOX and has infiltrated a mining corp. The corp has friendly fire off, so they feel pretty safe in space with the new guy. Assuming that the OP's proposal were implemented, the easiest Orca AWOXes in the world could be achieved by: 1. Get into a mining fleet with an Orca that is allowing you access to their fleet hangar. 2. Have an out-of-corp alt warp to you and drop something next to you. 3. Scoop this loot, suspect flagging yourself, and deposit the loot into the Orca's fleet hangar, suspect flagging the Orca. 4. The alt kills the Orca dead while you warp to safety. All because the Orca got suspect flagged for something you did, not them. Suspect flags should not be earned for actions that you did not commit. The potential for abuse is far too great. And I say this as someone who generally runs with their sec status negative. My Many Misadventures Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I seek to create content, not become content.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 679	Posted - 2015.03.04 19:19:51 - [56] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: All kidding aside, having a suspect flag transfer from a ship scooping the loot to a ship with a fleet hangar storing it is a monumentally horrible idea from the standpoint of the miner/hauler/anti-ganking community. Why? Well, imagine that you're someone who enjoys a good AWOX and has infiltrated a mining corp. The corp has friendly fire off, so they feel pretty safe in space with the new guy. Assuming that the OP's proposal were implemented, the easiest Orca AWOXes in the world could be achieved by: 1. Get into a mining fleet with an Orca that is allowing you access to their fleet hangar. 2. Have an out-of-corp alt warp to you and drop something next to you. 3. Scoop this loot, suspect flagging yourself, and deposit the loot into the Orca's fleet hangar, suspect flagging the Orca. 4. The alt kills the Orca dead while you warp to safety. All because the Orca got suspect flagged for something you did, not them. Suspect flags should not be earned for actions that you did not commit. The potential for abuse is far too great. And I say this as someone who generally runs with their sec status negative. That's the point I made above, its also why I laugh when people get upset about bumping and think it should cause aggression. Anyway it is what it is, the only option that the AG's have is to blow up the wreck before it can be scooped and just accept it as another mechanic that aids certain people, but I have to sneer each time they tell me how hard it is to be a ganker and this just adds to it! Ella's Snack bar
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 115	Posted - 2015.03.04 19:54:07 - [57] - Quote Zealous Miner wrote: If you want to beat the "bad guys" then you're going to have to put in just as much work as they do. Also, as anti-gankers in this game you are essentially vigilantes. Vigilantes carry out their own efforts without legal authority and aren't exactly famous for doing so in the exact manner the law prescribes. Just something to keep in mind. So, either be quicker on the draw or be prepared to fight dirty if it comes down to it. Just like real vigilante groups. If you want to space lawyer this, I'm not sure that a citizen who attempts to stop a crime in progress is considered a vigilante. And the term loses all meaning anyway when law enforcement utterly fails in it's responsibilities. Anti-piracy should be a valid playstyle in highsec and the game of alts so adeptly practiced by the bored bittervets doing most of the ganking renders it hopelessly futile. The best anti-code organization would be a mirror image with more alts. It's kind of sad.
Steppa Musana Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 25	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:17:49 - [58] - Quote Oh lookie here. Another thread where the gankers defend a bad mechanic because they are self serving like the carebears. I mean God forbid the game be made to be fun for everyone. Heavens forbid we give the other side any tools to use against us. Oh right, they have the tools, I forgot, they can just be gankers themselves! More proof that the highsec gank community are just carebears in disguise. Risk averse and self serving.
Kiryen O'Bannon Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans 217	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:20:02 - [59] - Quote Paranoid Loyd wrote: Kiryen O'Bannon wrote: Sinc you're stealing the loot from the rats in the first place, I see no reason why other players shpuld be penalized for stealing it first. Ostensibly rats are pirates and bad, but capsuleers are essentially amoral and when you warp into a mission the rats are justsitting there not bothering anyone until you show up to kick their ass and take their loot. No one is talking about stealing rat loot. They are talking about gank loot. Ah. I misunderstood then. Nevertheless I see no reason the same principle should not apply.
Zealous Miner 27	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:34:38 - [60] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: If you want to space lawyer this, I'm not sure that a citizen who attempts to stop a crime in progress is considered a vigilante. Anything that causes a suspect timer is not a crime. It just means CONCORD isn't coming to save you if you mess with someone. Anything that causes a criminal timer, surprise, surprise, is a crime. To put it simply: New Eden's laws don't care about can flipping and loot stealing. CONCORD doesn't care about can flipping or loot stealing. They let us capsuleers settle those things amongst ourselves. You were outwitted and weren't able to adequately deal with said situation in a lawful manner so, as I said: Be prepared to fight dirty and go against the laws in pursuit of your own agenda. Demerius Xenocratus wrote: And the term loses all meaning anyway when law enforcement utterly fails in it's responsibilities. As for the terminology: You've literally described a portion of the definition of the word "Vigilante." So, I would say its meaning is still quite accurate. /spacelawyer I voted for Sabriz Adoudel for CSM10. You should too. www.minerbumping.com



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.