These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec Hauling/Mining Kills - TY CCP for No Protection

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#321 - 2014-08-29 01:48:53 UTC
Since I've been doing a lot of bumping lately, I am going to rename my Stabber "Falcon Punch".

You know, since it knocks you out of bounds.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#322 - 2014-08-29 01:50:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning.

Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this. Lol


Well, if you wanted to give it to me, I can forward it to the correct people.

But if you choose not to get obviously scammed by me, you can forward it right to James 315, with the note of "purchase of shares" I believe.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#323 - 2014-08-29 01:50:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Ahost Gceo wrote:
I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be.
No, he really doesn't, because he has fundamentally misunderstood what kind of environment highsec is supposed to offer.

Quote:
CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat.
Just one problem: none of what you said is true.
CONCORD is working as intended. Aggressors are not being allowed. The targets can defend themselves, both from alpha and DPS, and gankers don't really rely on alpha anyway since it's far too costly.

Quote:
Hisec is hisec for a reason and it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit.
No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen next…?

The “high security” comes from the fact that you can gamble that people's miserliness will keep them from blowing you up ”just because” and instead need a compelling reason to pay the costs involved. That is all highsec is. The trick to living there is to always skew the odds so that gamble has a greater chance of paying off in your favour.
Ashiri Hareka
Paper Cats
#324 - 2014-08-29 01:51:26 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:


Gankers have already accepted the fact that they are going to lose a cheap ship. There is no deterrent for them at all. Risk is a myth that CCP keeps preaching hoping some will drink the cool-aid.

Only thing left is reward and acceptable losses. Acceptable losses are easily replaced, just buy more plex.

Telling new players there is something they can do is just lying to their face and hoping that they believe long enough to buy another plex.



Perhaps I should be posting on my miner/hauler alt.
She's not yet been ganked due to following the advice given here and in blogs such as Feyd's. (maybe she'll get ganked one day)

Losing a well tanked Procurer or Badger (up to 65k EHP) to a fleet of destroyers or a battlecruiser is an acceptable loss.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#325 - 2014-08-29 01:52:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Tippia wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Pretty sure I'm going to have to donate a few hundred mil on his behalf to CODE when I get home from work tomorrow morning.

Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this. Lol
Send isk directly to James 315* with share purchase as the reason, he puts it all into the SRP.

*Linked because there's always an imposter or 2 about.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Ahost Gceo
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#326 - 2014-08-29 01:52:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Ahost Gceo
Tippia wrote:
Ahost Gceo wrote:
I'm all for telling people that they need to harden up in EVE, and I'm not going to overlook the fact OP accepted the scam contract, but he does make a valid point about hisec not being the environment it was supposed to be.
No, he really doesn't, because he has fundamentally misunderstood what kind of environment highsec is supposed to offer.

Quote:
CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat.
Just one problem: none of what you said is true.
CONCORD is working as intended. Aggressors are not being allowed. The targets can defend themselves, both from alpha and DPS, and gankers don't really rely on alpha anyway since it's far too costly.

Quote:
Hisec is hisec for a reason and it should exist as such, not as a place for people to exploit game mechanics for their benefit.
No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost.

The “high security” comes from the fact that you can gamble that people's miserliness will keep them from blowing you up ”just because” and instead need a compelling reason to pay the costs involved. That is all highsec is.

I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves.

CCP ignore me please, I make too much sense.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#327 - 2014-08-29 01:53:11 UTC
Tippia wrote:

Come to think of it, who's the proper recipient for donations? I feel the sudden urge to fund even more of their mayhem because of all of this. Lol


Send ISK to James 315 with reason "Share Purchase" - you will be listed at the http://minerbumping.com blog as a supporter (unless you do not wish to be) and will be given shares in the New Order itself. 1 share = 1 million ISK. The cash goes into the fund we use to purchase all of our gank ships, and is only doled out to agents who provide full records of their kills/losses.

We thank you for thinking of supporting us!
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#328 - 2014-08-29 01:54:20 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
CCP Falcon wrote:
Tam Althor wrote:
Remember CCP Falcon, the level of protection that concord provides players is the same level of job protection you have when the high sec players decide to quit. Will you survive the next 20% layoff when it happens?


I love EVE and the core of what the game stands for. That's why I've been dedicated to it and its community for over 11 years now.

Risk vs Reward is a huge part of that.

Honestly, if that changed, and the game started to soften out and cater to those who want to have their hand held all the way through their gameplay experience, I'd rather not be working on the project regardless of how many subscribers we had, than sell out the core principles that New Eden was built on.

That's a sentiment that I hear a lot around the office, because we are all invested in what makes New Eden so compelling - The dark, gritty, hard reality beneath the pretty ships and nebulas.

EVE is built on the core principle that you are never 100% safe, no matter where you go or what you do. When you interact with another player, you roll the dice on whether they're going to screw you over or not. That's a massive part of the social engineering behind the very basic underpinnings of the EVE Universe.

Sorry, but your scaremongering counter argument makes no sense to me and carries no weight Smile



For the love of god Montressor, stop. It hurts.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#329 - 2014-08-29 01:54:32 UTC
Ahost Gceo wrote:
I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves.

Step 1: Find one…
loyalanon
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#330 - 2014-08-29 01:56:55 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
Why should CCP provide protection for your haulage in high sec?



Thread.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#331 - 2014-08-29 01:58:25 UTC
Tippia wrote:
No-one is exploiting any game mechanics. Highsec is highsec for a reason. It's not the reason you think, though. Highsec is highsec because it is a place where aggression comes at a cost. If you choose to nullify those costs, then take a wild guess what will happen next…?


A very easy way to remember this:

High Sec = High Cost for Aggression
Low Sec = Low Cost for Aggression
Null Sec = No Cost for Aggression

Simple, so very simple. I think only a child can get it.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#332 - 2014-08-29 01:59:54 UTC
To show our love of the Falcon, tonight's roaming high-sec death fleet will feature ALL SHIPS named with something special

http://puu.sh/bcaBV/78e35e7311.jpg

:) :)
Ahost Gceo
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#333 - 2014-08-29 02:01:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ahost Gceo wrote:
I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves.

Step 1: Find one…

Well if you read Minerbumping.

CCP ignore me please, I make too much sense.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#334 - 2014-08-29 02:06:07 UTC
Donation made to the New Order on behalf of CCP Falcon.

This thread has made my day.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#335 - 2014-08-29 02:06:27 UTC
Ahost Gceo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ahost Gceo wrote:
I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves.

Step 1: Find one…

Well if you read Minerbumping.


Autopilot doesn't count.

AFK is an acronym, but not for what you might think. It stands for A Free Kill.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
DJentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#336 - 2014-08-29 02:06:45 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Donation made to the New Order on behalf of CCP Falcon.

This thread has made my day.


On behalf of our many brave agents, we thank you!
Ahost Gceo
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#337 - 2014-08-29 02:09:40 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Ahost Gceo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ahost Gceo wrote:
I'd love for you to tell freighter pilots who fit for full tank yet get ganked when empty that they can defend themselves.

Step 1: Find one…

Well if you read Minerbumping.


Autopilot doesn't count.

AFK is an acronym, but not for what you might think. It stands for A Free Kill.

And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.

CCP ignore me please, I make too much sense.
Colitina
Doomheim
#338 - 2014-08-29 02:18:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Colitina
Ahost Gceo wrote:

CONCORD as a complex mechanic is broken, allowing aggressors to toodle about doing as they please while the targets can't really defend themselves from the gankboats that sport so much alpha damage or DPS that they instapop just about anything not fit for combat.

I have a Mastydon that 50 Tornados cannot gank.
Not fit for combat.

My Skiff would take about 9 Tornados
Not fit for combat.

The only ship I fly in high-sec that can be ganked reasonably? My mission boat.
Fit for combat.

P

The growing trend we can see here is that nearly everyone who wants ganking nerfed shows a lack of understanding of the game mechanics.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#339 - 2014-08-29 02:20:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Ahost Gceo wrote:
And there is discretion as to whether someone is autopiloting or not when a gank is made? I might believe that if the moon was actually made out of cheese.
When a freighter is seen dropping out of warp 15KM off of a gate, it's autopiloting. If it's one of the gates into somewhere like Uedama, someone will have seen it, and it's going to explode shortly thereafter.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Colitina
Doomheim
#340 - 2014-08-29 02:23:50 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Since I've been doing a lot of bumping lately, I am going to rename my Stabber "Falcon Punch".

You know, since it knocks you out of bounds.

If that's the case you should name it "Tournament Micro Jump Unit"