These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Hisec Ganking is Really Fun- and Easy ~my (long) story~

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Solecist Project
#41 - 2015-01-10 02:25:12 UTC
When the GM says it's not cheating, then it's not cheating.
Wtf are you on about, VV??

I get that it's silly of CONCORD to move to the ganker's rookie ship,
ignoring the obviousness of him luring him away ...

... on the other hand are your suggestions rather unpractical.


You are forgetting that each new GCC costs 15min time.
Waiting for another player to remove a spawn for you is silly ...
... and wasting another fifteen minutes to remove them, via a second GCC, is silly as well.


I still haven't replied you.
It's the topic. Or your reaction.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2015-01-10 02:31:51 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
So, +1 for doing something active and fun, but -3 for cheating (does not matter the miners did too).


Did you miss the part where I bumped him and decloaked, and then proceeded to scan him?

I learned that it didn't even matter that someone was pulling concord- someone was only pulling one instance of concord and there were two of us. For the concord trick to fully work, someone would have to pull one group of concord for each person suicide ganking.

I'll take that +3 back, thank you.
Tear Jar
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#43 - 2015-01-10 02:44:31 UTC
Aqriue wrote:
Can someone explain why asteroid belts still exist and why barges/exhumers are still able to be produced? Seems if they were removed and minerals were seeded, you could actually have a game where you don't shoot stupid worthless targets that never should of existed in the first place because the vessels are so damn stupid (the pod should blow up with the ship and they should lose SP, like a T3 to save you ammo). No, never had mining vessel if mine ganked as I quickly realized how fcking boring it was, just seems if asteroids where removed, minerals seeded, the vessels and their SP not refunded back by CCP, you would actually have a more interesting game instead of paper target bragging (I r awsume! where you sound like you have mental impediments) or training to be a clay pigeon / that goat tied like in the move Jurassic Park shortly before its eaten (still cannot figure out Why would any want to be a miner? Go play minesweeper or solitaire FFS, more distracting than CCP's poor mini game of sitting in belts doing nothing).

tl;dr aspect is just get rid of asteroids in general, game is far more interesting when you watch actual fights that is not some fat dude who saying how good they are at doing the easiest thing in game, like listening to someone say they are great at level 4 mission bashing Roll


I suspect that if they were making a new game CCP would definitely not include anything resembling mining. But they are afraid that eliminating it would lose a lot of subscribers who do mine and possibly wreak havoc on the general economy.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#44 - 2015-01-10 02:48:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Solecist Project wrote:
When the GM says it's not cheating, then it's not cheating.
Wtf are you on about, VV??


You love the "meta" enough to have it as a corp name, right? In my "meta", circumventing mechanics is cheating even if it's not CCP's "meta" (and therefore they won't forbid it).
It's really like the "ISBoxer" debate: CCP did not forbid it but some guys felt like it was similar to cheating anyway.

ISBoxer too had that rather "open ended" CCP wording, explaining "for now it's OK but we can change our minds". Once it ran rampant, CCP "changed their minds" if I recall correctly.
If Concord corraling ever went out of control stay sure CCP would change their mind over that too.

Gray area and stuff. I don't like gray areas, they make people use the third person like in the OP Twisted.


Solecist Project wrote:

You are forgetting that each new GCC costs 15min time.
Waiting for another player to remove a spawn for you is silly ...
... and wasting another fifteen minutes to remove them, via a second GCC, is silly as well.


Well, considering he says he got huge loads of alts, he should not be so concerned to have one or two "stuck".


Solecist Project wrote:

I still haven't replied you.
It's the topic. Or your reaction.


Yeah I tend to tell or reply things in a "diagonal, strange way" that either sting, or dig, or hurt. Or make think. Sometimes all of them.
You know, the kind of stuff that make people call famous guys like Steve Jobs a visionary... and non famous guys like me: "morons". P

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Tear Jar
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#45 - 2015-01-10 02:53:36 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

1) Just because "the law" does not ban you, does not mean you are not cheating (or are a poor sport anyway).
You can cheat your wife all life long and, even if discovered, you won't see the evil CCP man come to your house and put you to jail. However you still cheated.


Eve is a game about using every tactic you can to win. Its designed to be unfair.

The only ones who decide which tactics are in bad taste is CCP,
Tear Jar
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#46 - 2015-01-10 02:56:46 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
When the GM says it's not cheating, then it's not cheating.
Wtf are you on about, VV??


You love the "meta" enough to have it as a corp name, right? In my "meta", circumventing mechanics is cheating even if it's not CCP's "meta" (and therefore they won't forbid it).
It's really like the "ISBoxer" debate: CCP did not forbid it but some guys felt like it was similar to cheating anyway.

ISBoxer too had that rather "open ended" CCP wording, explaining "for now it's OK but we can change our minds". Once it ran rampant, CCP "changed their minds" if I recall correctly.
If Concord corraling ever went out of control stay sure CCP would change their mind over that too.

Gray area and stuff. I don't like gray areas, they make people use the third person like in the OP Twisted.


Solecist Project wrote:

You are forgetting that each new GCC costs 15min time.
Waiting for another player to remove a spawn for you is silly ...
... and wasting another fifteen minutes to remove them, via a second GCC, is silly as well.


Well, considering he says he got huge loads of alts, he should not be so concerned to have one or two "stuck".


Solecist Project wrote:

I still haven't replied you.
It's the topic. Or your reaction.


Yeah I tend to tell or reply things in a "diagonal, strange way" that either sting, or dig, or hurt. Or make think. Sometimes all of them.
You know, the kind of stuff that make people call famous guys like Steve Jobs a visionary... and non famous guys like me: "morons". P


Concord coralling is used on almost every gank in highsec. In fact, its considered bad mannered in the ganking communities to *not* pull Concord after a gank(its a pain for the next ganker).. If there was ever a point where it was "out of control", we have definitely passed that point.
Paranoid Loyd
#47 - 2015-01-10 03:06:09 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I am Ok with you creating content and applying Darwin law in EvE.

But, with all the thousands guys out there, you just HAD to exploit and corral Concord away, despite it's not OK for CCP?

Because I see you try and switch to a general "third person" but it's clear it's your (and / or your friend's) alts who corral Concord away, you even give it away (twice) when you say what you have done to a ship.

So, +1 for doing something active and fun, but -3 for cheating (does not matter the miners did too).
Ugh
Educate yourself

I wouldn't disagree with you but concord stays on grid until down time, so there needs to be a way to move them.


1) Just because "the law" does not ban you, does not mean you are not cheating (or are a poor sport anyway).
You can cheat your wife all life long and, even if discovered, you won't see the evil CCP man come to your house and put you to jail. However you still cheated.

2) If you feel so straight why did you put the sentences in third persons and used allusions? Blink

3) I have seen, lived, done and been all the oddest roles about miners ganking I could write a book. But in that book I could not write "Concord stays on grid until down time" because while technically correct, it never happens in any vaguely populated system.
In order to get that situation you really need to dig HARD and go so in some deep region in the middle of nowhere where you find that lone dude and then you have to waste half hour to hop around to find the next.
On the contrary, you seem to have the natural (and popular) attraction to juicy belts with stuff to pop without getting old and this involves active systems, where Concord is not going to stay up there for that long.
In case of doubt you could just play and pop miners at another belt (if it's not ice / lone belt) so Concord goes there. Next, you have a Concord free belt in the first location. And here you go, a shiny sport record!

So now I'm the OP?
I did not speak in third person and there is no allusion in my comment.

In a game, cheating is breaking the rules, simple as that.

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#48 - 2015-01-10 03:20:06 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.


No, I actually believe Concord sitting forever somewhere has no sense. It doesn't even happen with "RL police". It should despawn after some minutes.
Would auto-despawn affect some of the many EvE mechanics in a negative way? I don't recall (so many months I don't undock any more, I got rusty Sad ).

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#49 - 2015-01-10 03:24:39 UTC
I do hope all the props in here for that BS story are sarcasm. If not then it was a great troll on all the regulars.

Go read it again. With a little critical thinking (if that's even possible with you people) and notice all the holes, inconsistencies and mechanics errors.

Could have been a decent story if the OP had a clue. But in the end, y'all stroked his **** and I guess that's all that matters.

Mr Epeen Cool
Paranoid Loyd
#50 - 2015-01-10 03:31:19 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.


No, I actually believe Concord sitting forever somewhere has no sense. It doesn't even happen with "RL police". It should despawn after some minutes.
Would auto-despawn affect some of the many EvE mechanics in a negative way? I don't recall (so many months I don't undock any more, I got rusty Sad ).

So if they despawned, I would 100% agree with you, but they don't. So pulling them is the only way to keep the game fluid.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Paranoid Loyd
#51 - 2015-01-10 03:34:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Mr Epeen wrote:
I do hope all the props in here for that BS story are sarcasm. If not then it was a great troll on all the regulars.

Go read it again. With a little critical thinking (if that's even possible with you people) and notice all the holes, inconsistencies and mechanics errors.

Could have been a decent story if the OP had a clue. But in the end, y'all stroked his **** and I guess that's all that matters.

Mr Epeen Cool

I know I'm not as smart as you, but can you elaborate? He had the kills linked but they were taken out, if you look at his KB they are there, so I'm not sure what you mean. Must be that lack of ability to critically think. Help a slow-mo thinker out.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#52 - 2015-01-10 03:48:22 UTC
Considering I was in jabber with him as he was doing this, I doubt it was an elaborate story made up to provide us "content"

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Tear Jar
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#53 - 2015-01-10 05:30:16 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.


No, I actually believe Concord sitting forever somewhere has no sense. It doesn't even happen with "RL police". It should despawn after some minutes.
Would auto-despawn affect some of the many EvE mechanics in a negative way? I don't recall (so many months I don't undock any more, I got rusty Sad ).


It would be a modest buff to solo gankers. Mainly because right now if someone double ganks in a system then it can become impossible to pull Concord off grid.
Serene Repose
#54 - 2015-01-10 05:38:46 UTC
Tear Jar wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.


No, I actually believe Concord sitting forever somewhere has no sense. It doesn't even happen with "RL police". It should despawn after some minutes.
Would auto-despawn affect some of the many EvE mechanics in a negative way? I don't recall (so many months I don't undock any more, I got rusty Sad ).


It would be a modest buff to solo gankers. Mainly because right now if someone double ganks in a system then it can become impossible to pull Concord off grid.
Imagine, admitting to an exploit in public.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Dir Zen
Tax Haven 5.0
#55 - 2015-01-10 05:53:08 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I do hope all the props in here for that BS story are sarcasm. If not then it was a great troll on all the regulars.

Go read it again. With a little critical thinking (if that's even possible with you people) and notice all the holes, inconsistencies and mechanics errors.

Could have been a decent story if the OP had a clue. But in the end, y'all stroked his **** and I guess that's all that matters.

Mr Epeen Cool


Usually only quality posting from you, but you're the clueless one here. Refer to the earlier comments about the KB's being posted.
Solecist Project
#56 - 2015-01-10 08:09:04 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Tear Jar wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.


No, I actually believe Concord sitting forever somewhere has no sense. It doesn't even happen with "RL police". It should despawn after some minutes.
Would auto-despawn affect some of the many EvE mechanics in a negative way? I don't recall (so many months I don't undock any more, I got rusty Sad ).


It would be a modest buff to solo gankers. Mainly because right now if someone double ganks in a system then it can become impossible to pull Concord off grid.
Imagine, admitting to an exploit in public.
Sure, can do.

Like the postGCCwarp exploit.
Two exploits, which keep the facpo off your tail.
Three if we count the most obvious one.

Bugreported them all. :)
Some several times. (:


There, what do I win? XD

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Serene Repose
#57 - 2015-01-10 10:35:38 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
Tear Jar wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:

I have a lot of respect for you but you are way off base here. You did not address what I said at all.

Do you feel if one gank takes place in a particular spot, there should be no more ganking in that particular spot for the entire day? Let's keep in mind we are all trying to have fun. Having such a rigid situation does not sound like fun. There needs to be a way to move them or they need to despawn in a reasonable amount of time.


No, I actually believe Concord sitting forever somewhere has no sense. It doesn't even happen with "RL police". It should despawn after some minutes.
Would auto-despawn affect some of the many EvE mechanics in a negative way? I don't recall (so many months I don't undock any more, I got rusty Sad ).


It would be a modest buff to solo gankers. Mainly because right now if someone double ganks in a system then it can become impossible to pull Concord off grid.
Imagine, admitting to an exploit in public.
Sure, can do.

Like the postGCCwarp exploit.
Two exploits, which keep the facpo off your tail.
Three if we count the most obvious one.

Bugreported them all. :)
Some several times. (:


There, what do I win? XD

I just said "imagine" it. Geez.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Solecist Project
#58 - 2015-01-10 11:34:54 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
I just said "imagine" it. Geez.
No need, as long as it's safe talking about them. (:

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Justice Zeta
Doomheim
#59 - 2015-01-10 11:45:16 UTC
Popping miners is a carebear activity. Nice read though.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#60 - 2015-01-10 17:55:09 UTC
Justice Zeta wrote:
Popping miners is a carebear activity. Nice read though.


I believe the proper term is "nullbear", but thanks!