These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

At what point is something an Exploit and not game Mechanics ? Bumped for 60 Minutes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#661 - 2013-07-05 17:46:25 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Callyuk wrote:


of course it is for you :)


The day you catch a war target in a freighter while flying a frigate solo you will understand



Wouldn't a wartarget just be scrammed and held through active means and also not have Concord involved?


Where is the difference?

Both parties are holding down the target till they kill them.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#662 - 2013-07-05 17:48:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
S Byerley wrote:
Naw, counter is pretty much how I remembered it:
Tippia wrote:
“Is there anything at all that a solo freighter pilot can do in this situation to avoid being killed or is death a foregone conclusion the moment the attack is initiated?”

If it's executed flawlessly and without outside interruption, the victim is pretty much dead, as he should be.
…so in other words, there are plenty of counters and I never said otherwise

Quote:
No it wasn't.
Yes it was, and you couldn't mount any argument against the answer other than positing that “it's not the same thing” to which the current question is “how so?” (both paraphrased). You have yet to answer this question.

Quote:
You're not interesting enough to talk around in circles with, sorry.
Of course you are. It's all you do, after all. If you're actually not interested in doing so, here's a tip: just stop.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#663 - 2013-07-05 17:48:36 UTC
Schalac wrote:

No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game.


Holding a target in high sec till you can kill it

Holding a target in low sec till you can kill it

Holding a target in null sec till you can kill it

Holding a target in wormholes till you can kill it.

Where is the difference here?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#664 - 2013-07-05 17:54:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:


Maybe because they had no efficient countermeasure?


Right...

So a whole alliance did not have anyone able to fly logistic ships, insta canes/zealots/anything with medium guns, blackbirds, anything fitted with webs? Sounds like a terrible alliance that the freighter pilot should leave.


They bring in reppers, you still sit there bumping him for as long as you feel like.

Counter-attacking the the cats has similar problems.

As evidenced in this case and others, webs are generally not sufficient once the bumping has started.

Their best option would presumably be to counter-bump the Mach's, but trying to fly sufficient ships in when you could potentially finish your gank at any time is (I suspect) generally not worth it.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#665 - 2013-07-05 17:57:01 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
Nothing kept the pilot from logging off and doing something with his life, the outcome would have been the same either way.

In the end, it's just another ship loss and an hour wasted. Station camps, bubbles, heck, even just 2 gate-jumps and a long warp in 10% tidi can easily cost me an hour. Are those exploits and harassment as well now? Just eject, podex and get on with your life next time, will save you 58 minutes.



That's pretty much saying "you can avoid car accidents by not driving, therefore we don't need to make cars safer".

Good luck with that.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Callyuk
M1A12 Corp
#666 - 2013-07-05 17:57:25 UTC
Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :)
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#667 - 2013-07-05 17:59:02 UTC
Callyuk wrote:
Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :)


im pretty sure i know how were making up for that and it doesnt involve highsec freighters
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#668 - 2013-07-05 17:59:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…so in other words, there are plenty of counters and I never said otherwise


Context silly. You said that he(not his alliance) didn't do anything when you said yourself there was nothing he could do.

Quote:
Yes it was


Nope; wasn't.

Quote:
Of course you are. It's all you do, after all. If you're actually not interested in doing so, here's a tip: just stop.


With other people, about interesting things; you don't measure up.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#669 - 2013-07-05 18:02:59 UTC
S Byerley wrote:


They bring in reppers, you still sit there bumping him for as long as you feel like.

Counter-attacking the the cats has similar problems.

As evidenced in this case and others, webs are generally not sufficient once the bumping has started.

Their best option would presumably be to counter-bump the Mach's, but trying to fly sufficient ships in when you could potentially finish your gank at any time is (I suspect) generally not worth it.


Wrong.

Ganking these things is a fine line, start taking us out with defensive ships, jamming us or just repping means we will give it up and go after something easier.

They had an hour, a gift from god to most people, to get a defensive fleet to him and they didn't even try. There is only one person to blame for this lasting as long as it did and that's the pilot of that freighter.

Even just bringing webbing ships would have made a difference as it is entirely possible to get aligned with something in the time it takes the macks to burn out turn around and fly back in.

Demanding huge game breaking changes to the game because a handful of players are terrible is no argument.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#670 - 2013-07-05 18:03:13 UTC
Elizabeth Aideron wrote:
Callyuk wrote:
Trying to defend your cash cow with the tech nerfs coming we all understand :)


im pretty sure i know how were making up for that and it doesnt involve highsec freighters


Can't be going all that well with all the whining and conspiracy nonsense everyone was posting yesterday.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#671 - 2013-07-05 18:05:02 UTC
Schalac wrote:
No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game.
How is it in any way more free? If they don't aggress you (and thus die), you can get out of it at zero effort. Compare this to low or null, where they can keep you stuck at no effort 'til downtime.

Quote:
That is the total opposite of consistent.
It's been made very consistent: no matter what you fly and where, if you get into combat, you can't escape by logging off. There are no special cases of “having done X to A so therefore B can do Z to C for N minutes because of rules clause P” — there are just five states of legality, four states of aggression, and a very distinct set of rules to get yourself (and only yourself) into any of these states. These states and their corresponding timers are the same all over the place with no exception to ensure that you always understand what they entail.

Quote:
Look, I have no idea why you are defending this infinitely ridiculous game mechanic
What's ridiculous (much less infinitely so) about it?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#672 - 2013-07-05 18:06:10 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
jamming us or just repping means we will give it up and go after something easier.


Your laziness doesn't really change the dynamic; though it does shed light on why you're so defensive.

Quote:
Demanding huge game breaking changes to the game because a handful of players are terrible is no argument.


Good thing no one is.
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#673 - 2013-07-05 18:08:04 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
jamming us or just repping means we will give it up and go after something easier.


Your laziness doesn't really change the dynamic; though it does shed light on why you're so defensive.


ganking is always balanced for laziness in some sense. defense against ganking for mining barges is fitting a tank because it requires more people and expense to gank them
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#674 - 2013-07-05 18:10:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
S Byerley wrote:
Context silly. You said that he(not his alliance) didn't do anything when you said yourself there was nothing he could do.
Context, silly. I said that once the attack has begun (i.e. he's already done a number of mistakes and missed a couple of counters), the remaining outs require outside help (i.e. it can still be countered), and even then, he can capitalise on mistakes the gankers make (giving him a few more counters).

So in other words, there are plenty of counters and I never said otherwise.

Quote:
Nope; wasn't.
So your only counter-argument is “nu-uh”. We can therefore safely conclude that it is the same thing and that you cannot think of even the slightest shred of an argument to the contrary. Goodie, surrender accepted. Thus, your question has been answered in full, and it's your turn to start providing answers to all the other questions that have queued up in the meantime.

So: why did the OP let the gankers keep him there for an hour and do nothing to help himself?
Quote:
With other people, about interesting things; you don't measure up.
Of course I do. You keep at it, after all. If you're actually not interested in doing so, here's a tip: just stop.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#675 - 2013-07-05 18:13:00 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…aside from determining intent, which will be required if it is to be classified as harassment.


Citation needed.


How on earth are you still acting like intention isn't key?

I'll present two really simple situations for you to mull over:

Before we start, lets remember that if I kill the freighter, that is legitimate use of the tactic: I have destroyed someone elses assets, possibly profited from it, etc. So it's absolutely, unarguably valid if I kill it at the end. It is *possibly* harassment if I don't kill it, and instead just keep it stuck without purpose.

Situation 1: I bump a freighter for one hour with my mach just as pure harassment (theres of course an entirely different argument about what constitutes harassment - a single instance, even if it lasts an hour, would not, in my opinion, but thats not relevant right now - lets assume it is). After the hour, I leave, satisfied.

Situation 2: I bump a freighter for one hour with my mach as I intend to kill it. I'm waiting for buddies of mine to get themselves online and in catalysts and get to gate. Something important pops up (wife, phonecall, powercut, whatever) that causes/forces me to leave the game, letting the freighter escape despite my intentions to eventually kill it.

Without making a judgement about my intent, and without being able to know the factors outside the game itself, how would you determine which one is harassment and which isn't?

Hint: You can't



Would the catalysts still be at the gate waiting?

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#676 - 2013-07-05 18:14:20 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
though it does shed light on why you're so defensive.


Yes, the fact that it is very easy to defend a freighter from a gank and that your ideas will damage the game.

You are literally trying to patch stupid.
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#677 - 2013-07-05 18:14:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Schalac wrote:

No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game.


Holding a target in high sec till you can kill it

Holding a target in low sec till you can kill it

Holding a target in null sec till you can kill it

Holding a target in wormholes till you can kill it.

Where is the difference here?

How they are held, and the process that you can go about countering the person that is holding you. In low, null and WH you can shoot the target without the certainty of losing your ship. In highsec if you shoot the target you WILL lose your ship. That is the biggest difference you can possibly get.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac
Templar Knightsbane
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#678 - 2013-07-05 18:18:36 UTC
Sooo 15 pilots killed 1 pilot...

Whats the flippin issue??

Tactics and planning, along with the freighter pilots LACK of tactics and planning, got him killed...

Get over it.

30+ pages on this issue is ********!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#679 - 2013-07-05 18:18:47 UTC
Schalac wrote:

How they are held, and the process that you can go about countering the person that is holding you. In low, null and WH you can shoot the target without the certainty of losing your ship. In highsec if you shoot the target you WILL lose your ship. That is the biggest difference you can possibly get.


Show me a freighter with guns.
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#680 - 2013-07-05 18:19:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Schalac wrote:
No it hasn't. If anything it allows you to harass people more freely in high sec than in any other part of the game.
How is it in any way more free? If they don't aggress you (and thus die), you can get out of it at zero effort. Compare this to low or null, where they can keep you stuck at no effort 'til downtime.

Quote:
That is the total opposite of consistent.
It's been made very consistent: no matter what you fly and where, if you get into combat, you can't escape by logging off. There are no special cases of “having done X to A so therefore B can do Z to C for N minutes because of rules clause P” — there are just five states of legality, four states of aggression, and a very distinct set of rules to get yourself (and only yourself) into any of these states. These states and their corresponding timers are the same all over the place with no exception to ensure that you always understand what they entail.

Quote:
Look, I have no idea why you are defending this infinitely ridiculous game mechanic
What's ridiculous (much less infinitely so) about it?

If bumping is combat then make it an aggressive act and flag them for retaliation. If not then it is an abuse of game mechanics and should be deemed an exploit to do so constantly while in high sec. This is only partly about escape. It is more about having a viable counter to a broken game mechanic and if CCP can't add one in then they should outlaw it and people that use this tactic in the future will have actions taken against their account.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac