These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Biohazard Joins the CODE. Alliance in Uedama Ganking Ships

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2014-08-08 10:55:32 UTC
Is it still the case that kills done 100% by Concord and/or gate guns, don't automatically show on killboards unless manually posted?
ez caper
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2014-08-08 13:41:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ez caper
did the talwar fail ganks allready take place?

kinda have trouble picturing bio. in something else :)

EDIT : or are you handing our catalysts for them?
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2014-08-08 14:45:12 UTC
Nameira Vanis-Tor wrote:
Useful intel. I suspect they won't be too good at it - all a high sec corp has to do is join Gal or mini militia and then freely smash the ganked fitted ships. That is assuming though that high sec indy corps know what PvP is...



Wait wait. That means I can fly to Udaema and find an endless supply of war targets in poorly tanked ships with limited ammo?

ShockedSmileBig smileLolTwisted

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2014-08-08 15:31:52 UTC
Personally I don't see any issues with ganking freighters, haulers, miners, even shuttles and noob ships.

In null or low sec it is a no brainer assuming the target is not blue to the ganker. A certain level of skill and/or luck is required on the part of the ganker to find and kill the target, coupled with the decision on the part of the target to place his vessel in the hostile environment in the first place.

In high sec it can be justified, when the benefit outweighs the expected losses. I'm thinking an operation where a freighter is scanned to find a valuable cargo and then a suicide gank is carried out with a hauler being brought in to scoop the loot and the expected haul to more than cover the cost of the lost suicided ships.

I take my hat off to people that manage this. I've even done it a couple of times. The fact that I don't do it more is because it isn't as easy as it sounds. Requires patience and a sec status which I just can't be bothered to maintain or pay for. That's assuming that the purpose of said gank, has a 'real' objective. I say this because there is no skill on the part of the ganker, or luck involved, or bad play on the part of the target.

And there is the rub that I think most people have with Code and other parties that do what they do. What is their objective?

Looking at Code's Killboard, it clearly isn't profit. It appears to be Killboard padding. Now in my opinion killboard padding is a valid objective. However, if you are going for killboard padding, you have to be honest. It seems these people are exploiting the fact that their losses to Concord are not pulled to the killboard, so they are getting these great killboard stats and isk efficiencies while just pretending that they didn't lose anything and we haven't even got onto the very real and significant additional cost of buying back your sec status.

In short they are trading Isk via a flawed mechanic for killmails so that they can pretend to be leet PvPers.

They will of course say, it is about the tears etc, but I think this bitter comment was very telling.

DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Of course, those on the other side of the fight who manage to do 1% damage against a catalyst in high-sec while concord does the other 99% is a honorable warrior who scored a "real" kill and should be praised, right?

It is clear that the real sting for the author here is that the 1% damage from another player, resulted in the killmail getting pulled by the killboards.

Guys, if it is killboard padding you want and you can't be honest about it. A more efficient method would be to just post fake mails. But I guess the popular independent killboards take measures to stop that sort of thing. It's just not fair is it?
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#25 - 2014-08-08 16:07:02 UTC
Major Trant wrote:
Now in my opinion killboard padding is a valid objective



look how bad you are
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2014-08-08 16:18:25 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Major Trant wrote:
Now in my opinion killboard padding is a valid objective



look how bad you are

Confirming that I have padded my killboard with several lossmails belonging to TrouserDeagle for no strategic reason other than that I could.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#27 - 2014-08-08 16:38:20 UTC
Major Trant wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Major Trant wrote:
Now in my opinion killboard padding is a valid objective



look how bad you are

Confirming that I have padded my killboard with several lossmails belonging to TrouserDeagle for no strategic reason other than that I could.


1v1 top belt, my killboard vs your killboard
George Gouillot
MASS
Pandemic Horde
#28 - 2014-08-08 17:07:51 UTC
I am glad that this awesome corporation has found its final destiny after years of searching - and such an adequate one.
Burn Uedama forever!
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#29 - 2014-08-08 17:08:46 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Ihubs dont have guns, freighters dont have guns. I think i get it now :)

Thanks for the clarification.


Yes, take a fast look at the CODE. alliance killboard and you'll clearly see we never shoot anyone that shoots back. Except when we do. Which is often.

We also never kill anything in low sec, nullsec, or wormhole space. Except when we do.

My advice to everyone is to create support tickets, for some weird reason CCP keeps showing all of our kills as "real" and "valid" kills even though we all know none of them actually count, right? Something must be bugged. :P



CODE. in july killed 4,407 ships;

- 4,118 high sec ganks.

- 281 kills in pyne with an insta-lock camp that runs away from anything that might fight back.

- 0 null sec kills.


So, let's recap:

You say:

"For some people, shooting at ships with no guns is the riskiest thing they will ever do."

I provide evidence of nearly 300 ships this month with guns killed by my alliance.

You ignore that, as we scored those kills in ways you feel don't have enough e-bushido. rofl :) Just admit you were totally wrong, HTFU, move on.

lol as usual - I provide evidence of nearly 300 kills against ships that were armed and took place outside of high sec, and of course they don't count. We had superior numbers and better locking speed. We got some of them at a low sec gate-camp. We did not bow three times as proper fleet bushido mandates. We had better guns. The list goes on and on :) This is classic and happens every single time someone claims "CODE does not ever shoot anyone who shoots back!" (which, by the way, you totally claimed!) and then when provided with evidence that totally disproves your statement, you come up with a reason why that does not count. We blobbed. Our lock time was too fast. We had more ships. We had better team-work. It was not a "fair" fight.

Of course, those on the other side of the fight who manage to do 1% damage against a catalyst in high-sec while concord does the other 99% is a honorable warrior who scored a "real" kill and should be praised, right? :) Such lulz. We get this every single day. The tears fill our jars and we laugh about it, all day, every day, while we continue to win.

As to you not seeing any nullsec kills, you need to look harder. We don't often roam null - but there's some kills here and there. Also, why should we? We can roam and kill anywhere we want, and every single kill we make counts according to the game. CCP supports them, they are kills, they are PVP, the killboards list them, the ingame kill log lists them - this sounds like a problem you need to take up with CCP. Give them your list of what makes a kill "real" or "count" and ask them to modify the game to only include those kills. So by your standards, only null-sec kills that do NOT take place at a gate where the attackers are smart enough to bring fast tackle should count? Get that support ticket going, dude.

Again, you should really create a support ticket. It's funny, our kills seem to still keep counting, and around 100 of us seem to keep outperforming most massive null-sec alliances in terms of number of kills - and it all seems to still count! There must be some kind of bug :P


So you're saying 13% of your kills were valid PvP fights, and not ganks? That metric still doesn't look good from a mathematical viewpoint.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#30 - 2014-08-08 17:25:02 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Good stuff.


What i actually wrote was the stats were better than i thought and you guys are actually awesome. It would seem you doubt my sincerity? I wonder why that is?


Nice edit :)
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#31 - 2014-08-08 17:27:38 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:

So you're saying 13% of your kills were valid PvP fights, and not ganks? That metric still doesn't look good from a mathematical viewpoint.


No, 100% of our kills were valid PvP fights. There was a player, and another player or group of players engaged them in combat, thus: player vs. player.

My point was a response to an earlier comment, where the tired rhetoric of "CODE never shoots at anything that can shoot back" was thrown out there (except when we do, which appears to have been %13 of the time over whatever time period was sampled there. Thirteen percent > zero percent.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#32 - 2014-08-08 17:34:39 UTC  |  Edited by: DJentropy Ovaert
Major Trant wrote:


(snip)

And there is the rub that I think most people have with Code and other parties that do what they do. What is their objective?

Looking at Code's Killboard, it clearly isn't profit. It appears to be Killboard padding. Now in my opinion killboard padding is a valid objective. However, if you are going for killboard padding, you have to be honest. It seems these people are exploiting the fact that their losses to Concord are not pulled to the killboard, so they are getting these great killboard stats and isk efficiencies while just pretending that they didn't lose anything and we haven't even got onto the very real and significant additional cost of buying back your sec status.

DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Of course, those on the other side of the fight who manage to do 1% damage against a catalyst in high-sec while concord does the other 99% is a honorable warrior who scored a "real" kill and should be praised, right?

It is clear that the real sting for the author here is that the 1% damage from another player, resulted in the killmail getting pulled by the killboards.

Guys, if it is killboard padding you want and you can't be honest about it. A more efficient method would be to just post fake mails. But I guess the popular independent killboards take measures to stop that sort of thing. It's just not fair is it?


Ummm, no :)

Well thought out post, and thanks for it - but you're missing some of the point.

We don't gank for profit - there's no need for it. Every single ship we use is 100% free and paid for by fans of the New Order / our blog. Personally I don't gank for "tears" (though I know some people who do!) - I gank for fun. I find hunting down targets and exploding them to be a ton of fun. There's no point in "killboard padding" - a lulzy killboard comes naturally when you fly with CODE, but anyone with any experience can see the difference between a CODE agent's killboard and a more "traditional" type of PVP player's killboard. I take losses all the time, does not bother me at all.

We gank for a reason that the high-sec carebear will never ever understand in a thousand years - fun. We don't care about ISK/hour, killboards, e-bushido - we just like watching things burn in the name of James 315. It's very lulzy ;)

As to your final comment about the 1% damage someone might do on a gank ship and as a result killboards pulling that - zkillboard pulls everything. It does not matter if CONCORD/FacPol did 100% of the damage or a player did 100% of the damage. It's still a loss, and it still counts. We are totally fine with that :) Check this out:

http://puu.sh/aK5Dg/7df357bb54.jpg

As you can see, all of my losses are there. And those losses were 100% CONCORD/FacPol kills.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#33 - 2014-08-08 17:37:31 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Estella Osoka wrote:

So you're saying 13% of your kills were valid PvP fights, and not ganks? That metric still doesn't look good from a mathematical viewpoint.


No, 100% of our kills were valid PvP fights. There was a player, and another player or group of players engaged them in combat, thus: player vs. player.

My point was a response to an earlier comment, where the tired rhetoric of "CODE never shoots at anything that can shoot back" was thrown out there (except when we do, which appears to have been %13 of the time over whatever time period was sampled there. Thirteen percent > zero percent.


I would just like to clarify, that was over june and july, there were no low sec kills in june so the actual percentage over that sample was closer to 6%.

CONGRATULATIONS!!
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#34 - 2014-08-08 17:39:12 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


I would just like to clarify, that was over june and july, there were no low sec kills in june so the actual percentage over that sample was closer to 6%.

CONGRATULATIONS!!


I would just like to clarify that you claimed 0% and still have not admitted you were totally wrong :P
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#35 - 2014-08-08 17:41:06 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


I would just like to clarify, that was over june and july, there were no low sec kills in june so the actual percentage over that sample was closer to 6%.

CONGRATULATIONS!!


I would just like to clarify that you claimed 0% and still have not admitted you were totally wrong :P


That is exactly why im congratulating you.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#36 - 2014-08-08 17:45:43 UTC
On a related note: When you are browsing our kill boards if you take a look at "losses" you will notice we get shot down by other players from time to time and take losses of our own. The reason people don't know about this is that unlike high-sec miners, we don't create 60 page threadnaughts begging CCP to nerf guns in high-sec, unlike the average high security miner :)
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#37 - 2014-08-08 17:46:31 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


I would just like to clarify, that was over june and july, there were no low sec kills in june so the actual percentage over that sample was closer to 6%.

CONGRATULATIONS!!


I would just like to clarify that you claimed 0% and still have not admitted you were totally wrong :P


That is exactly why im congratulating you.


Fair enough :) L33t pvp, eh mate? It's just a well known fact: the CODE always wins :)
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#38 - 2014-08-08 17:52:42 UTC
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
DJentropy Ovaert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


I would just like to clarify, that was over june and july, there were no low sec kills in june so the actual percentage over that sample was closer to 6%.

CONGRATULATIONS!!


I would just like to clarify that you claimed 0% and still have not admitted you were totally wrong :P


That is exactly why im congratulating you.


Fair enough :) L33t pvp, eh mate? It's just a well known fact: the CODE always wins :) When ganking miners.


Fixed that for you.
Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#39 - 2014-08-08 18:03:53 UTC
SO

Capsuleers who are independent of the Empires they may choose to represent somehow are going to start an all out war with 2 major empires who are apparently allies by ganking what? Other capsuleers independent of the empires? Its not like they ganked an imperial navy vice admiral and murdered him in cold blood, since when have the empires ever cared when we died? We just pop back up like weeds in the backyard.

Oh right thats because we cant die

The idea behind this is pointless, the empires wont subject their citizens to all out war over independent ships which they neither care about nor have an affiliation with being exploded in the vast space lanes of Eve even if they bear a MILITIA flag they dont represent the royal navy, and they arent attacking the State Directly or vice versa.

End thread

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
Zen Guerrilla
CTRL-Q
Ushra'Khan
#40 - 2014-08-08 19:28:22 UTC
Wow.

Gotta give DJentropy Ovaert some credit for trying so damn hard to convince everyone what CODE does is proper pvp.

pew pew