These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Aggression/Log off issues
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Martinez
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#21 - 2011-09-28 21:36:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Martinez wrote:
There is no reason to log off during combat to save your ship.
Wow. There's a self-defeating statement if I ever saw one.
Quote:
It shouldnt be allowed in any way.
…and yet, it really can't be avoided. In fact, the game already has probably the most reasonable way of dealing with it it with its variable log-off aggression timers.



Lol here we go again, tippia and his dumb responses. This is a game, in games there are wins and losses. If you cannot afford to fly it dont fly or for the love of God dont fly it during wartime in empire.

It can be avoided, if your ship is pointed, you dont leave combat for 15 mins. Seems pretty clear to me. Either log off in a safe area during war or in 0.0, or risk your ship. The current way isnt resonable since it still allows pilots to log off to save their ship.

The fact you would defend a player logging off to save their ship shows how out of touch you are with pvp.


Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#22 - 2011-09-28 21:44:35 UTC
Martinez wrote:
Well, I can't think of anything to say since I know I'm wrong and therefore have to go for the personal attacks straight away.
Sad to hear, but at least you agree. It's not an issue.
Quote:
This is a game, in games there are wins and losses.
…and there are rules who determines who “wins” and who “loses”. In this case, neither did, all according to the rules.
Quote:
It can be avoided, if your ship is pointed, you dont leave combat for 15 mins.
Exactly. The OP failed to do that, so he didn't get his precious kill. That's really his problem.
Quote:
The fact you would defend a player logging off to save their ship shows how out of touch you are with pvp.
The fact that you think this isn't a non-issue and that it wasn't resolved roughly eons ago shows that you have no clue about EVE, be it the PvP bits or anything else.
Rutger Centemus
Joint Empire Squad
#23 - 2011-09-28 21:49:07 UTC
Hobogear wrote:
"EDIT: I find it funny that most of the posters in this thread have killboards full of entries, mostly kills. Yup. We're all carebears"


yes with your extensive killboard record of 83 kills i am sure you are a expert on the situation.

1) My first check on eve-kill shows 92 kills for that character and 0 for you. You were saying?
2) The word is "through", not "threw".
3) Do you see that shiny yellow button with the word "quote" written over it? Try it some time.
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#24 - 2011-09-28 21:55:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Katrina Oniseki
Hobogear wrote:
"EDIT: I find it funny that most of the posters in this thread have killboards full of entries, mostly kills. Yup. We're all carebears"


yes with your extensive killboard record of 83 kills i am sure you are a expert on the situation.


I'm new to PvP, but you didn't address any of the other posters who agree with me... who have much better killboards.

Since the definition of a carebear is someone who avoids combat.. I don't think I qualify anymore. ;)

EDIT: Also... since I have the guts to... complain with your main. Stop using a noob alt. Let's see your 3l1t3 sk1llz.

Katrina Oniseki
Hobogear
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2011-09-28 22:32:25 UTC
Rutger Centemus wrote:
Hobogear wrote:
"EDIT: I find it funny that most of the posters in this thread have killboards full of entries, mostly kills. Yup. We're all carebears"


yes with your extensive killboard record of 83 kills i am sure you are a expert on the situation.

1) My first check on eve-kill shows 92 kills for that character and 0 for you. You were saying?
2) The word is "through", not "threw".
3) Do you see that shiny yellow button with the word "quote" written over it? Try it some time.




1. I am a alt. Not posting with my main to for intel reasons.

2. English isnt my main language.

3. That shiny yellow button doesnt always work.
Jita Alt666
#26 - 2011-09-28 22:33:09 UTC
Martinez wrote:
This is a game, in games there are rules. If you cannot handle the rules don't fly or for the love of God dont fly it during wartime when some one knows the rules better than you.


Fixed it for you.
Logging off is an accepted game mechanic.

OP:
If the mark is using log off trick to escape... ...why not use log on trick to counter him?

Learn eve.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#27 - 2011-09-28 22:36:58 UTC
Hobogear wrote:
1. I am a alt. Not posting with my main to for intel reasons.
Ok. Se he isn't allowed to use meta-game tactics to avoid hostilities, but you are.

Got it.
Hobogear
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2011-09-28 22:43:22 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Martinez wrote:
Well, I can't think of anything to say since I know I'm wrong and therefore have to go for the personal attacks straight away.
Sad to hear, but at least you agree. It's not an issue.
Quote:
This is a game, in games there are wins and losses.
…and there are rules who determines who “wins” and who “loses”. In this case, neither did, all according to the rules.
Quote:
It can be avoided, if your ship is pointed, you dont leave combat for 15 mins.
Exactly. The OP failed to do that, so he didn't get his precious kill. That's really his problem.
Quote:
The fact you would defend a player logging off to save their ship shows how out of touch you are with pvp.
The fact that you think this isn't a non-issue and that it wasn't resolved roughly eons ago shows that you have no clue about EVE, be it the PvP bits or anything else.



It wasnt really a personal attack, it was a fact. You run around the forums trying to carry the water for ccp and their fail game mechanics.

The rules that determine winners and losers are being exploited.

As far as the ship not being pointed, come on. If they were in pvp ships, they pointed the jf. Its kind of the first thing you do. Dont be a simpleton.

Eve has changed alot since the start. Some things have changed for the better, some things no so. I want the game to be the best it can be. Letting people avoid pvp by logging off is a lame tactic and still needs to be addressed.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#29 - 2011-09-28 22:52:53 UTC
Hobogear wrote:
It wasnt really a personal attack, it was a fact. You run around the forums trying to carry the water for ccp and their fail game mechanics.
Wait what? I'm “trying to carry the water for ccp”
AAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*breathe*

AAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Lol

Right. Maybe you should take a look around a bit more.
Quote:
The rules that determine winners and losers are being exploited.
Not really, no, since according to the rules, what happened is entirely legal. You just failed to make use of the rules that would make you a winner in the situation. This is your problem, not his and not the game's.
Quote:
As far as the ship not being pointed, come on. If they were in pvp ships, they pointed the jf.
…except that it doesn't matter unless you do it in time.
Quote:
Letting people avoid pvp by logging off is a lame tactic and still needs to be addressed.
It has already been addressed as well as it can be: by adding disappearance timers to people who have actually become a party to PvP.
Hobogear
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2011-09-28 23:07:35 UTC
Tippia[quote wrote:
The rules that determine winners and losers are being exploited.
Not really, no, since according to the rules, what happened is entirely legal. [/quote]



Please tell me where it is stated in the "rules" by ccp this is ok. As a matter of fact I would say that in the 'rules' its illegal to log off to avoid combat.

Now this goes back to the fact that a game mechanic is being exploited.
Ranger64511
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2011-09-28 23:10:57 UTC
Hobogear wrote:
A jf pilot lands on a highsec gate from low sec. he jumps threw. on the other side, there is a war target to the jf pilot. the jf pilot logs off while still cloaked giving the wartarget pilot roughly 15 to 20 secs to burn threw all the shields, armor, and hull. unless he has alot of people with him this isnt going to happen the jf pilot disappears. 20 to 30 mins later the pilot of the jf is booted from his corp while not logged in. the pilot logs in to the wartargets safely and flys away.

how in anyway should this be allowed by ccp as a game mechanic. anytime ccp is going to take down the server they post a message saying get safe. if you log off in a dangerous area the risk of being pointed and killed right when you log off should be still there. if you dont want to die while logged off log off in a "safe" place. in no way should logging off be a viable option to avoid death.



Log on trap maybe? As long as you get aggression on him you can just scan him out.

This is my gate. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My gate is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my gate is useless. Without my gate, I am useless.
Cpt Fina
Perkone
Caldari State
#32 - 2011-09-28 23:16:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Cpt Fina
The viablity to logg off with large ships – making them near invoulnerable during wartime – makes as much sense as disbanding and cloning your corp to avoid the war-mechanic. But judging by the answers in this thread people are perfectly fine with the ability to fly 5 billion isk ships – that can be fueling the war-effort – without having to face any risk.

Once upon a time the eve community had a coherent voice in condemning actions like this, I'm mainly thinking of the public outcry when RA was accused of systemizing loggofski-strategies for their fleets. And also the problem with fleets of multiple supercaps logging off in synch to minimize losses when their support has been killed. I really hope that the responders in this thread isn't representative of the community because I personally think this is so batantly screwed up that it shouldn't have to be discussed.
Hobogear
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2011-09-28 23:19:59 UTC
Ranger64511 wrote:
Hobogear wrote:
A jf pilot lands on a highsec gate from low sec. he jumps threw. on the other side, there is a war target to the jf pilot. the jf pilot logs off while still cloaked giving the wartarget pilot roughly 15 to 20 secs to burn threw all the shields, armor, and hull. unless he has alot of people with him this isnt going to happen the jf pilot disappears. 20 to 30 mins later the pilot of the jf is booted from his corp while not logged in. the pilot logs in to the wartargets safely and flys away.

how in anyway should this be allowed by ccp as a game mechanic. anytime ccp is going to take down the server they post a message saying get safe. if you log off in a dangerous area the risk of being pointed and killed right when you log off should be still there. if you dont want to die while logged off log off in a "safe" place. in no way should logging off be a viable option to avoid death.



Log on trap maybe? As long as you get aggression on him you can just scan him out.




no he landed on the gate and jump into us. he stayed cloaked. he logged off. we pointed him and got to him to hull but the ship just disappeared.
Tamiya Sarossa
Resistance is Character Forming
#34 - 2011-09-28 23:22:04 UTC
This is a 'problem' for freighters in general, and in many circumstances. The joy is in showing people that they can't in fact be flown risk free, if you just get a little creative. My preferred method is disposable nuet alts cloaked with ECM bursts. Freighter sees gate is clear and local is clear, starts to warp, decloak and burst - you've got fifteen minutes to do the actual killing. Works on freighters jumping into lowsec, WT's in highsec, pretty much anywhere. It's just a game of manipulating mechanics to your advantage - have fun with it.
Frozen Eddie Johnson
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#35 - 2011-09-28 23:23:35 UTC
People in this thread defending the logoffski "tactic" are sad, and a large part of what is wrong with EVE nowadays.
Ranger64511
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2011-09-28 23:26:07 UTC
Frozen Eddie Johnson wrote:
People in this thread defending the logoffski "tactic" are sad, and a large part of what is wrong with EVE nowadays.


I don't defend it but after losing so many possible kills you end up coming up with other tactics to kill em.

This is my gate. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My gate is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my gate is useless. Without my gate, I am useless.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#37 - 2011-09-28 23:28:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Hobogear wrote:
Please tell me where it is stated in the "rules" by ccp this is ok.
It doesn't work that way.
You need to show that it's illegal, because that is how the rules work.

As it happens (and unfortunately for you), logging off to escape campsanything has been confirmed as legal by the GMs for many many years now… Largely because that's the most balanced way of doing things when ye olde Internet is involved. As a concession, you have the disappearance timer if you actually manage to aggress the target while he's online.
Frozen Eddie Johnson wrote:
People in this thread defending the logoffski "tactic" are sad, and a large part of what is wrong with EVE nowadays.
…aside from the fact that “nowadays” stretches back for several years by now. It's legal. There are tactics to work around it. And the tactic can be used in both directions, so meh.
Cherry Nobyl
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2011-09-28 23:32:21 UTC
Hobogear wrote:

no he landed on the gate and jump into us. he stayed cloaked. he logged off. we pointed him and got to him to hull but the ship just disappeared.




then i have 2 questions for you:

1) how long did you have at the point of placing a point to apply damage? it's either 1 minute, or 15 minutes. if it's 1 minute, then there's a valid complaint and a possibly bugged mechanism. if it's the full 15 minute aggression timer then we move on to q 2.

2)what type of ships were applying dps? if you had 15 minutes to apply damage, then there was some thing wrong with your composition on the gate. if you had 1 minute, then yes virginia, santa claus has died in your chimney.
Avon
#39 - 2011-09-28 23:36:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Avon
If you "nerfed" this mechanic people would just stick their JF alts back in NPC corps.
Unless you think CCP are going to remove NPC corps, there is no point crying about the old logoffski no matter how much you may dislike it.

Speaking of alts in NPC corps, there sure seem to be a lot of them in this thread complaining about a mechanic which does not concern them.
Cypermethren
Perkone
Caldari State
#40 - 2011-09-28 23:37:37 UTC
Give the freighter/jump freighter pilots tools to defend themselves?



At current, the penalty for being able to move massive ammounts of crap around is that you cant do crap. All you can do is waddle along like a fat penguin, and bend over when the likes of the OP show up.

you have two options.


1)Log off.

2)Ask the people that are about to turn you into the villiage bicycle to be gentle and to use protection.


In the world of a hauler theres not much you can do, the epic scene of a lone hauler vs a single gate camper is a rare and yet beautifull sight.

That is, if the hauler is actualy a transport ship that's actualy fit for its purpose, and the only battle in this scene is the gatecamper belting the crap out of the hauler, and the hauler running as fast as his invisible spacelegs will take him back to the gate to jump to safety.



Should you have an escort if you're in a defenceless ship and moving items of value? yes.

Is it pratical/possible to have an escort with you, every step on the way, every time you decide you need to move stuff? no.

Does this thread bring forwarth an issue that has been around for a long time but CCP is bluntly refuzing to address? Yes.

Is CCP going to ignore this thread? Yes




TLDR:


Freighters, and Jump Freighters, as well as the logoff mechanic need to be sat down and reviewed, along with a huge list of other thigns that CCP is going to continualy ignore, but hey, this thread makes you feel better, right!?!?