Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
338
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 10:23:22 -
[1] - Quote
Hey CCP. Allow me to board a ship in space while criminal. Im a glutton for punishment.
HTFU
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5088
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 13:12:05 -
[2] - Quote
Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. |
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
339
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 13:34:48 -
[3] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. I am hyperdunking
HTFU
|
Aleksey Chadov
Sovereign's Servant
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 13:54:47 -
[4] - Quote
Hyperdunking is gone. Suck it up already. |
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
340
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 14:29:41 -
[5] - Quote
Aleksey Chadov wrote:Hyperdunking is gone. Suck it up already. Its not gone.
HTFU
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5088
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 14:41:08 -
[6] - Quote
Faylee Freir wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. I am hyperdunking
I thought that was deemed an exploit? |
Cade Windstalker
644
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 15:18:24 -
[7] - Quote
OP is pretty clearly trolling, or they just got back after a long hiatus and tried to do this and are now sad and therefore complaining on the forums. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4708
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 15:35:27 -
[8] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. Because a really niche, cost-ineffective form of suicide ganking that barely ever happened was apparently a huge problem. |
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
340
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 16:02:17 -
[9] - Quote
Simpleminded fools. How little you know about mechanics.
HTFU
|
Cade Windstalker
645
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 16:54:11 -
[10] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. Because a really niche, cost-ineffective form of suicide ganking that barely ever happened was apparently a huge problem.
Actually no, it was very very cost effective, because the single biggest cost for a suicide gank is the number of pilots required to gank a well tanked ship. This negated that nearly completely.
Faylee Freir wrote:Simpleminded fools. How little you know about mechanics.
Yes, lets insult everyone else in the thread. That's sure to get them on your side .
Seriously though, I assume you're talking about keeping someone bumped until you can gank them the rest of the way. That whole interaction is something CCP are looking at changing, so that's not a reason for this to come back. Also even if you're doing that the extra time can be used by a smart pilot to evac some or all of his items. I know someone who managed to get 10bil off a Bowhead before it went splodey-pop to a bomber gank because of the time mechanics like this allowed him. |
|
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
343
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 18:33:33 -
[11] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. Because a really niche, cost-ineffective form of suicide ganking that barely ever happened was apparently a huge problem. Actually no, it was very very cost effective, because the single biggest cost for a suicide gank is the number of pilots required to gank a well tanked ship. This negated that nearly completely. Faylee Freir wrote:Simpleminded fools. How little you know about mechanics. Yes, lets insult everyone else in the thread. That's sure to get them on your side . Seriously though, I assume you're talking about keeping someone bumped until you can gank them the rest of the way. That whole interaction is something CCP are looking at changing, so that's not a reason for this to come back. Also even if you're doing that the extra time can be used by a smart pilot to evac some or all of his items. I know someone who managed to get 10bil off a Bowhead before it went splodey-pop to a bomber gank because of the time mechanics like this allowed him. Yes its cost effective, but so is using catalysts with a load of F1 monkeys and/or using,12-14 bombers with a handful of F1 monkeys. Also a fully tanked freighter or jumpfreighter is a huge deterrance for someone wanting to hyperdunk.
No, Im not talking about normal ganks. Hyperdunking in its essence is still very do-able. To show how little you actually know, I will explain why its utterly hilarious why everyone cried about this:
All you needed to do to stop a hyperdunk was literally 1 t1 logi or something like a stabber to bump the bowhead away from the freighter. You could also bring an insta-locking svipul to pop the gankers pod. So being that the majority of all hyperdunks happened within a few jumps of a major trade hub, batphoning for you sweet white-knights isnt out of reach.
So I will continue to insult those of you that have no idea at all how to hyperdunk, how involved of an activity it was, how insanely easy it was to interrupt by literally 1 person, and how much time and effort it took to bump a freighter off grid. Hyperdunking is still very alive and well to this very day and thats why those of us that know how to bend and manipulate ****** mechanics to our favor will always be in a better spot to determine what is and isnt fair. Not to mention that knowledge and an understanding of mechanics outs you at a huge advantage in this game... I feel qualified to call you a moron. I understand that CCP wont revert this change, and it doesnt bother me. I will continue hyperdunking under CCPs nose when theu thought they have thwarted it. So cheer on, poor whiteknight baby and revel in the fact that at least 1 person is still hyperdunking.
HTFU
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2998
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 05:53:36 -
[12] - Quote
My hypothesis: OP got ganked, believes he was hyperdunked, is now trying to aggro CCP to fix problem which does not exist.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Cade Windstalker
648
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 06:24:17 -
[13] - Quote
Faylee Freir wrote:Yes its cost effective, but so is using catalysts with a load of F1 monkeys and/or using,12-14 bombers with a handful of F1 monkeys. Also a fully tanked freighter or jumpfreighter is a huge deterrance for someone wanting to hyperdunk.
In practice... not really so much. This was shown by the willingness of people to engage in the practice to a wide enough degree that CCP patched it out. Also since the only real reason to want to board a ship after going GCC was hyperdunking and similar mechanics there's no reason to request this change unless you want that back.
Also, as I said, the hardest part of that is getting the 70 or so Catalysts you need to take down a fully tanked ship. Bombers aren't bad, but they're still not as ISK efficient as a larger number of Catalysts can be because the hulls are about 20 times more expensive but only output around 2-3 times the DPS (skills and resists on the target depending).
Faylee Freir wrote:No, Im not talking about normal ganks. Hyperdunking in its essence is still very do-able. To show how little you actually know, I will explain why its utterly hilarious why everyone cried about this:
All you needed to do to stop a hyperdunk was literally 1 t1 logi or something like a stabber to bump the bowhead away from the freighter. You could also bring an insta-locking svipul to pop the gankers pod. So being that the majority of all hyperdunks happened within a few jumps of a major trade hub, batphoning for you sweet white-knights isnt out of reach.
Again, in practice this isn't feasible for a lot of players and wasn't often done. The only way most people are going to be able to respond to something like this is with an alt, and if an alt is the only way to deal with something it's probably a bad mechanic because it creates a distinct and large advantage to a small subset of the active playerbase.
Faylee Freir wrote:So I will continue to insult those of you that have no idea at all how to hyperdunk, how involved of an activity it was, how insanely easy it was to interrupt by literally 1 person, and how much time and effort it took to bump a freighter off grid. Hyperdunking is still very alive and well to this very day and thats why those of us that know how to bend and manipulate ****** mechanics to our favor will always be in a better spot to determine what is and isnt fair. Not to mention that knowledge and an understanding of mechanics outs you at a huge advantage in this game... I feel qualified to call you a moron. I understand that CCP wont revert this change, and it doesnt bother me. I will continue hyperdunking under CCPs nose when theu thought they have thwarted it. So cheer on, poor whiteknight baby and revel in the fact that at least 1 person is still hyperdunking.
Unless you care to explain what the current state of the mechanics actually are in your view then this thread is pretty much dead since you're just sitting there insulting people and claiming you know best, which pretty obviously isn't the case since you seem to be looking at the game through a gank-shaped peep-hole.
That either means you're pretty sure what you're doing is an exploit and could get you banned, or might be declared one and then you can't do it anymore. In either case that's not a terribly strong argument for allowing GCC players to board ships. Neither is "well CCP missed a way we can still do this thing so it should be made easier."
Honestly it kind of sounds like you just made this thread to lord your imaginary internet spaceship 1337-ness over others which is... kinda sad actually, lol. |
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
348
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 07:15:09 -
[14] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Faylee Freir wrote:Yes its cost effective, but so is using catalysts with a load of F1 monkeys and/or using,12-14 bombers with a handful of F1 monkeys. Also a fully tanked freighter or jumpfreighter is a huge deterrance for someone wanting to hyperdunk. In practice... not really so much. This was shown by the willingness of people to engage in the practice to a wide enough degree that CCP patched it out. No I can tell you as one of 4 people that were hyperdunking that unless the freighter is carrying 10b+ and youre in a 0.5 its not worth it to go after tanked freighters or jump freighters.
Quote:Again, in practice this isn't feasible for a lot of players and wasn't often done. The only way most people are going to be able to respond to something like this is with an alt, and if an alt is the only way to deal with something it's probably a bad mechanic because it creates a distinct and large advantage to a small subset of the active playerbase. Whats not feasible about having support for a capital class ship that is hauling 3-5b+ and is extremely vulnerable? Also operating in Jita and in the pipes theres a lot of anti-gankers and white-knights that knew who the primary ones were that hyperdunked, amd knew how to stop it. Cant tell you how many 9b+ ganks Ive had ruined when I was a few volleys away from popping it only to have a WK or the guys friends show up.
Do you have an excuse for the 5 jump freighters I was able to hyperdunk? Im telling you that getting yourself out of a hyperdunk is extremely simple and only the worst fall victim.
Quote:Unless you care to explain what the current state of the mechanics actually are in your view then this thread is pretty much dead since you're just sitting there insulting people and claiming you know best, which pretty obviously isn't the case since you seem to be looking at the game through a gank-shaped peep-hole.
That either means you're pretty sure what you're doing is an exploit and could get you banned, or might be declared one and then you can't do it anymore. In either case that's not a terribly strong argument for allowing GCC players to board ships. Neither is "well CCP missed a way we can still do this thing so it should be made easier." Mechanics are basically still the same. The only way this would be considered an exploit is if CCP deemed bumping as an exploit.
So heres my justification for bringing back boading ships while GCC:
- Only a small number of pilots were actively doing it (around 4) - The act of hyperdunking is hilariously easy for anyone to interrupt - Not all freighters or jump freighters were worth the time and energy to dunk - Jump Freighters can easily cyno out if in jump range (and should never really get bumped in the first place) - Regularly involved scooping loot with your own freighter, causing it to go suspect - Was a big investment for a ~chance~ that the loot would drop - Took skill to perform low velocity bumps and multi-task
Thats a decent list for starters.
HTFU
|
Rain6637
NulzSec
34627
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 13:26:05 -
[15] - Quote
ain't no dunking like a hyperdunking and the hyperdunking don't stop
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Rain6637
NulzSec
34627
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 13:28:41 -
[16] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Faylee Freir wrote:Simpleminded fools. How little you know about mechanics. Yes, lets insult everyone else in the thread. That's sure to get them on your side you started it, unless I'm wrong about how the flow of time works http://i.imgur.com/hId6NJ5.png
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Cade Windstalker
659
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 20:18:48 -
[17] - Quote
Faylee Freir wrote:No I can tell you as one of 4 people that were hyperdunking that unless the freighter is carrying 10b+ and youre in a 0.5 its not worth it to go after tanked freighters or jump freighters.
Gee, it's almost like most of the ganking in the game period takes place in .5 systems and there's a .5 chokepoint called Uedama...
Faylee Freir wrote:Whats not feasible about having support for a capital class ship that is hauling 3-5b+ and is extremely vulnerable? Also operating in Jita and in the pipes theres a lot of anti-gankers and white-knights that knew who the primary ones were that hyperdunked, amd knew how to stop it. Cant tell you how many 9b+ ganks Ive had ruined when I was a few volleys away from popping it only to have a WK or the guys friends show up.
Do you have an excuse for the 5 jump freighters I was able to hyperdunk? Im telling you that getting yourself out of a hyperdunk is extremely simple and only the worst fall victim.
First off, Freighters aren't actually capitals. They don't have any of the benefits or restrictions of a true Capital and don't require or benefit from the Capital Ships skill.
That's sort of beside the point though, as I said in practice people simply don't support Freighters like that because it's incredibly boring to do for another player. There are certainly random people willing to mess up your gank (hyper or otherwise) but that's hardly reliable, and the same goes for having friends in the vicinity able to help. That's just not something CCP could balance around, and as I said previously the practice of hyperdunking seriously messed up with risk/reward balance of hauling.
Faylee Freir wrote:Mechanics are basically still the same. The only way this would be considered an exploit is if CCP deemed bumping as an exploit.
So heres my justification for bringing back boading ships while GCC:
- Only a small number of pilots were actively doing it (around 4) - The act of hyperdunking is hilariously easy for anyone to interrupt - Not all freighters or jump freighters were worth the time and energy to dunk - Jump Freighters can easily cyno out if in jump range (and should never really get bumped in the first place) - Regularly involved scooping loot with your own freighter, causing it to go suspect - Was a big investment for a ~chance~ that the loot would drop - Took skill to perform low velocity bumps and multi-task
Thats a decent list for starters.
responses:
- Volume doesn't mean it wasn't a broken mechanic.
- We've been over this, normal ganks are pretty hilariously easy to interrupt as well, if you happen to have a Blackbird sitting on the gate, but that doesn't commonly happen (and the BB itself has about a 50/50 shot of just getting ganked if the gankers are paying attention) so this doesn't justify Hyperdunking as a mechanic.
- So? Your argument here seems to be "well it's not going to mess up *all* trade so..."
- This just flat out doesn't matter. For a start, it's situational, and gets back to the "need alt to counter mechanic" argument, since you need a cyno in the right place at the right time. If anything this is actually *less* practical than having logi on-grid or something cloaked up to pop the pod.
- This is just a blatant lie. You can scoop most loot a Freighter is likely to be carrying with 100% safety using a DST and another alt in a noob ship. In fact I know for a fact you're aware of this as you made a thread complaining about it several months back. Even if you do scoop the loot with a freighter you're going to either be off-grid from the gate (because bumping) or so far away as to be functionally safe from retaliation as you align, hit loot all, and warp in the space of about 1 second.
- You and I both know how these economics work. The functional risk for a gank with many loot stacks is tiny, and across multiple probably profitable ganks you can make quite a bit of money.
- Isn't really much of an argument either. Lots of things in the game take skill, but that doesn't mean they're good for the game and letting a single player gank a Freighter with a hold full of Catalysts was deemed not good for the game.
Also, regarding bumping, we're both aware that CCP is and has been looking and bumping mechanics due to the one-sided nature of the interaction and functional inability for a Freighter to get away from a bumper with more than one brain cell.
So yeah, I don't find your list particularly compelling. None of it addresses the core problem with hyperdunking, which was that a single player could do something that previously required tons of coordination. That would be roughly equivalent of a single player managing to run Incursions for decent payout, which completely removes the main challenging element of it which is gathering and managing the players... oh wait, that's pretty much what banning input broadcasting was!
So yeah, unless you have a reason letting a single player pull this off is somehow fair and balanced I think you have a pretty poor argument for your case here.
Also yeah, nothing you've described here is "hyperdunking" since the one thing that made a dunk/gank "hyper" was the ship switching. |
Cade Windstalker
659
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 20:20:40 -
[18] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Faylee Freir wrote:Simpleminded fools. How little you know about mechanics. Yes, lets insult everyone else in the thread. That's sure to get them on your side you started it, unless I'm wrong about how the flow of time works http://i.imgur.com/hId6NJ5.png
I was generally snarking, nothing in there was intended as a personal attack. If OP feels insulted by anything in that post then I apologize, it wasn't intended to be mean spirited, I honestly figured they were trolling or back from hiatus. |
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
353
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 14:46:57 -
[19] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Gee, it's almost like most of the ganking in the game period takes place in .5 systems and there's a .5 chokepoint called Uedama... Obviously if you're looking to gank, a 0.5 is most desired. Uedama and the pipe were always bad for hyperdunking because of how notorious it was for ganking in general... So you saw a lot more white knights that will start looking for you once they see you in local.
Quote:First off, Freighters aren't actually capitals. They don't have any of the benefits or restrictions of a true Capital and don't require or benefit from the Capital Ships skill. They are capital class ships and have been categorized as such by CCP. Whatever arbitrary reason you want to use to make it fit your narrative is fine though.
Quote:That's sort of beside the point though, as I said in practice people simply don't support Freighters like that because it's incredibly boring to do for another player. There are certainly random people willing to mess up your gank (hyper or otherwise) but that's hardly reliable, and the same goes for having friends in the vicinity able to help. That's just not something CCP could balance around, and as I said previously the practice of hyperdunking seriously messed up with risk/reward balance of hauling. I agree that essentially being a space trucker isn't the most exciting way to play the game, and that it's a necessity for a lot of things that go on in the game (especially for lowsec and nullsec alliances). I don't think that because the activity of hauling stuff is boring is a good excuse to provide proper support and protection for your chosen career and investments... Especially when the prime targets for hyperdunking are triple expanded freighters hauling more than 3-5b (depending on the system). It's not in the "spirit of eve online" to give these players a pass on an activity they have added immense risk, then state that they shouldn't have to have proper support for these capital class ships.
Some of the people looking to mess with hyperdunks were random, but we had quite the following of pilots with real hate-boners that would find us and stop us almost daily. Not to mention there's an entire community that is built around stopping ganks. I will also note that the skill, resources, and pilots required to stop a hyperdunk vs a normal freighter gank is really no comparison. AG try and fail all the time to stop ganks, while anytime a white knight or AG showed up to foil one of my hyperdunks, it was over.
Quote: Volume doesn't mean it wasn't a broken mechanic. I don't see it as being a broken mechanic.
Quote: We've been over this, normal ganks are pretty hilariously easy to interrupt as well, if you happen to have a Blackbird sitting on the gate, but that doesn't commonly happen (and the BB itself has about a 50/50 shot of just getting ganked if the gankers are paying attention) so this doesn't justify Hyperdunking as a mechanic. As I stated earlier, hyperdunks are infinitely easier to stop than a normal gank. You're just plain wrong about this and a blackbird isn't going to stop a gank. You are aware almost everytime a freighter is ganked they account for logi and jams? The fact that a single pilot in an Osprey can stop a hyperdunk proves my point.
HTFU
|
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
353
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 14:48:33 -
[20] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: So? Your argument here seems to be "well it's not going to mess up *all* trade so..." My argument was that hyperdunking wasn't some new epidemic of meta that was taking all the trade hubs and pipes by storm. It was literally like 4 people and paled in comparison to other ganking activities.
Quote: This just flat out doesn't matter. For a start, it's situational, and gets back to the "need alt to counter mechanic" argument, since you need a cyno in the right place at the right time. If anything this is actually *less* practical than having logi on-grid or something cloaked up to pop the pod. It does matter, because I dunked 5 jump freighters. You literally have no business owning a JF if you don't have at least 1 cyno alt. Sorry, I know you want to believe that all activities shouldn't require alts, but you'll be hard pressed to find anyone recommend that someone get into a JF without their own cyno alt. Having an emergency cyno ready isn't really a counter, it's just a basic part of owning a JF.
Quote: This is just a blatant lie. You can scoop most loot a Freighter is likely to be carrying with 100% safety using a DST and another alt in a noob ship. In fact I know for a fact you're aware of this as you made a thread complaining about it several months back. Even if you do scoop the loot with a freighter you're going to either be off-grid from the gate (because bumping) or so far away as to be functionally safe from retaliation as you align, hit loot all, and warp in the space of about 1 second. Freighters are required for plenty of ganks. I have also had a suspect freighter of mine get tackled and killed. I still hold the same opinion about DST scooping, which is why I'm of the camp that thinks gankers should grow a pair and go suspect in a freighter :)
Quote: You and I both know how these economics work. The functional risk for a gank with many loot stacks is tiny, and across multiple probably profitable ganks you can make quite a bit of money. Obviously it's profitable, otherwise the amount of people ganking would be negligible. The loot fairy is fickle though, and RNG has pooped on me enough for it to be something that I worry about.
Quote: Isn't really much of an argument either. Lots of things in the game take skill, but that doesn't mean they're good for the game and letting a single player gank a Freighter with a hold full of Catalysts was deemed not good for the game. The circumstances in which a freighter or jump freighter can find himself in position to be a prime candidate for a good dunking is enough to justify a solo or small group activity such as this. I seriously doubt you've seen it performed from start to finish, much less know the fine details that make it a beautiful work of art.
HTFU
|
|
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
353
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 14:49:24 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:Also, regarding bumping, we're both aware that CCP is and has been looking and bumping mechanics due to the one-sided nature of the interaction and functional inability for a Freighter to get away from a bumper with more than one brain cell. Everything has a counter or a direct way or set of methods to prevent certain things from happening, and that includes bumping.
Quote:So yeah, I don't find your list particularly compelling. None of it addresses the core problem with hyperdunking, which was that a single player could do something that previously required tons of coordination. That would be roughly equivalent of a single player managing to run Incursions for decent payout, which completely removes the main challenging element of it which is gathering and managing the players... oh wait, that's pretty much what banning input broadcasting was! I've never FC'd a gank fleet, but I would say that the beautiful orchestra that is hyperdunking takes more coordination than a regular freighter gank. In most every gank fleet you have a handful of players that are capable of assisting the FC and making sure that certain things get done. With a hyperdunk, you do it all yourself.
It is hyperdunking. Not the exact form that we previously knew, but its definitely hyperdunking. I have a different name for it in mind, but we can settle on calling it, "Hyperdunking 2.0". I plan on making a sweet video of it, and I'll gladly share it :)
HTFU
|
Iain Cariaba
3430
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 19:40:10 -
[22] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:...letting a single player gank a Freighter with a hold full of Catalysts was deemed not good for the game. I don't know about that. Freighter pilots think it's perfectly okay for a single person to stuff several billions ISK worth of goods into a papier-m+óch+¬ box and have that same single person fly it several light-years to market.
If it's okay for a single player to haul the GDP of several small countries, why is it bad for a single player to be able to stop them?
Seems like a bit of a double standard there.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
EvE is a PvP game. Stop pretending it isn't.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5635
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 20:53:03 -
[23] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Faylee Freir wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Look up hyperdunking for why they stopped this. I am hyperdunking I thought that was deemed an exploit?
Not that I can find. In fact...
Quote:Since the introduction of the Bowhead freighter, weGÇÖve become aware of a tactic that has been introduced which has become known as GÇ£HyperdunkingGÇ¥. This involves leaving a grid where a criminal action occurs to draw away CONCORD and reshipping to continue shooting at a target. ThereGÇÖs been much discussion among members of the community regarding this tactic, and whether or not it is considered legitimate gameplay.
After meeting with members of the game design and customer support teams and discussing this in depth, we have come to the consensus that due to the fact no rules are being broken and any ship that is involved in a criminal act is being destroyed by CONCORD as intended, that this tactic is simply an unintended but legitimate use of new game mechanics, and is not in breach of the rules. Tactics similar to this have been used with previous hulls before the Bowhead was introduced, and have been considered perfectly legitimate in the past.
With this in mind, at this time we do not consider this tactic to be in breach of the game rules, and as such our customer support team will not be offering reimbursements for hulls lost in this manner.
Players are also reminded that if someone is criminally flagged, they are fair game to be attacked in self-defense. Feel free to use this to your advantage.--CCP Falcon
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5635
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 20:56:11 -
[24] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:...letting a single player gank a Freighter with a hold full of Catalysts was deemed not good for the game. I don't know about that. Freighter pilots think it's perfectly okay for a single person to stuff several billions ISK worth of goods into a papier-m+óch+¬ box and have that same single person fly it several light-years to market. If it's okay for a single player to haul the GDP of several small countries, why is it bad for a single player to be able to stop them? Seems like a bit of a double standard there.
Agreed, just about every point Cade brings up can be applied to ganking in general. And no alts are not necessary, but they might be more efficient if one is going to try and transfer stuff from the bumped ship to a none-bumped ship (you don't have to ping for them to get on line, come from many jumps away, etc.).
As for why hyperdunking was patched out I can find no explanation from CCP. So any explanation proposed by anyone, aside from a Dev or somebody else "official", is likely just their own personal views.
Edit: And if the OP has found a way to hyperdunk once again, well done.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3794
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 21:48:56 -
[25] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:
I thought that was deemed an exploit?
That's the first time it was brought up, not the time that they stopped it after it was getting too prolific. So that's an out of date quote.
I can't recall if they stated any form of hyper dunking was specifically an exploit or not but given they changed game code to stop it, it's probably an exploit to be able to do it now since you are circumventing a code change. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
19748
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 22:24:03 -
[26] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
I thought that was deemed an exploit?
That's the first time it was brought up, not the time that they stopped it after it was getting too prolific. So that's an out of date quote. I can't recall if they stated any form of hyper dunking was specifically an exploit or not but given they changed game code to stop it, it's probably an exploit to be able to do it now since you are circumventing a code change. they didnt, they just patched out the ability to do it , or thought they did if you take faylee at his word.
Murderers of Negotiable Motivations
=]|[=
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5635
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 22:39:23 -
[27] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
I thought that was deemed an exploit?
That's the first time it was brought up, not the time that they stopped it after it was getting too prolific. So that's an out of date quote. I can't recall if they stated any form of hyper dunking was specifically an exploit or not but given they changed game code to stop it, it's probably an exploit to be able to do it now since you are circumventing a code change. they didnt, they just patched out the ability to do it , or thought they did if you take faylee at his word.
Yes, as far as I can tell there was no explanation for the change. Maybe they felt it was an exploit, IDK, but they never deemed it an exploit and if one can find away to do it without circumventing the code.....
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Faylee Freir
The Phoenix Rising Vendetta Mercenary Group
353
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 23:19:34 -
[28] - Quote
There was no explanation or reason for the change from CCP. All we had to,go by was their official statement on it and many many support tickets put in on the subject. Everything was kosher, until it was...not. I was on SISI one day testing something for hyperdunking and got an error message when trying to board a ship as a criminal.
See this is how CCP treats those of us push the limits of the game in creative and neat ways.
Hyperdunking is not listed as an exploit and is still very possible.
HTFU
|
Morgan Agrivar
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
745
|
Posted - 2016.12.27 01:17:46 -
[29] - Quote
I think Japanese women are hawt.
Thanks for listening... |
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
893
|
Posted - 2016.12.27 16:23:25 -
[30] - Quote
Everyone stop feeding the troll please |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |