These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Message Regarding "Hyperdunking"

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#61 - 2015-01-27 19:13:35 UTC
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#62 - 2015-01-27 19:14:07 UTC
Crumplecorn wrote:
An announcment of CCP not ******* up, and olympic grade mental gymnastics from carebears, all in one thread. I approve.

In my day, we used to call this toasting in an epic bread.


In this case, the bread in question would presumably be sourdough?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#63 - 2015-01-27 19:16:27 UTC
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
If we want the policy changed, all we have to do is hyperdunk Chribba in his Veldnaught...

CCP would reverse position on this faster than Concord could respond. Roll
Going by past occurrences of him being killed Chribba would probably say "GF" in local, and that would be the end of it as far as he's concerned.

afkalt wrote:
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Fit a tank


I don't believe you know how this works. In the slightest.

Or did you find a way to ninja an ACTIVE tank onto a freighter?
Try quoting the whole post next time so as to not look like a fool, it was an answer to a question that specifically referred to mining, as such it has precisely nothing to do with freighters.


Tell me again how a buffer can help this.

Or do you fit barges with active tanks? >snicker<
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#64 - 2015-01-27 19:17:11 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I don't disagree, but then the gankers should also have to put some bloody effort in.
There it is. the underlying emotion based 'reasoning' behind an unreasonable worldview. "But, but, the other guy should have to work as hard as I think I am too!!!! It's not FAIR!!!" This thinking is at the core all every single anti ganking, scamming and afk-cloking post ever posted. Kind of a screwed up video game egalitarianism.
Of course they should have to work for it. I'm fed up of listening to CODE players going on and on and on about how easy the carebears have it while ganking is insanely easy, nearly risk free and without consequence. Now it's officially easy to solo gank basically any ship. Excuse me if I thought this is EVE Online where the game is supposed to take a modicum of effort.
Thanks for proving my point Emotional bro. I know you're just thinking of the children though Twisted

Or did you think that CCP would forever coddle you and the rest of the complainers? Eventually, things have to balance out. instead of whining about it on a forum, why aren't you theory crafting ways to turns this back on the gankers and make them feel bad (that you can then post and otherwise teach to people who would be targets of this tactic)? That's how I deal with gankers (and afk-cloakers et al), out think them before undocking.

Oh yea, that's right, too much EFFORT to actually play the game, much easier to metagame the situation by lobbying CCP to fix it for you. Right?
So what you're saying is no, gankers should not have to put in effort. Only the defenders should have to.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2015-01-27 19:23:26 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So what you're saying is no, gankers should not have to put in effort. Only the defenders should have to.



No they definitely do, the key thing here is that no amount of tanking matters any more, if it is not active/regenerative.

It will be more economical to fit and rig it for warp speed and use a pair of guardians instead of traditional buffer.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#66 - 2015-01-27 19:25:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Lucas Kell wrote:
But that's not the only consequence. You are unable to warp for a reason. Why even bother having that restriction if it can just be bypassed?
The reason that you are unable to warp is clear, it's so that you can't use the same ship to gank multiple targets before Concord makes your ship explode. The restriction isn't being bypassed, hyperdunking doesn't allow you to gank multiple targets before Concord makes your ship explode.

Quote:
And you shouldn't be able to. Clearly it is supposed to shut you down. Even the OP call it "unintended".
If CCP intended that you shouldn't be able to board a ship while under GCC they would have coded it that way. What the GCC does is shut down your ability to warp and make sure every ship that you do board or undock in explodes at the hands of Concord.

Quote:
That you're supposed to get a 15 minute timer for a gank. Instead you get a 2 minute timer if you gank 2 minutes after your first one.
Let's not forget that this is a single gank, it's not multiple ganks and if anything people who hyperdunk are actually extending the GCC timer beyond that which is necessary when ganking with multiple pilots

Quote:
I don't disagree, but then the gankers should also have to put some bloody effort in. This means they can just chuck as many 2m isk catalysts at a target as they need.
Where are you getting this 2M Catalyst fit from, most gankers using Catalysts are using T2 fits which cost 4X that.

As for effort, the gankers are putting a damn sight more effort into their gameplay than their hapless targets who choose to fly with billions of ISK in cargo, and then choose to do so through known ganking hotspots.

Quote:
To be honest it's pointless arguing with someone like you because you're not interested in what's fair and balanced gameplay.
Au contraire, I'm all about balanced gameplay; it's people like you who seek to make it unbalanced in favour of those who choose not to use existing mechanics to protect their stuff from others that would like to relieve them of it.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#67 - 2015-01-27 19:25:58 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So what you're saying is no, gankers should not have to put in effort. Only the defenders should have to.



No they definitely do, the key thing here is that no amount of tanking matters any more, if it is not active/regenerative.

It will be more economical to fit and rig it for warp speed and use a pair of guardians instead of traditional buffer.

or a mate in a daredevilBlink

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#68 - 2015-01-27 19:26:15 UTC
Tippia wrote:
They are. Chucking as many Catalysts at a target as needed to kill it is vastly more effort than is required of the target. This is the worrying trend in ganking: gankers are forced to put more and more and more effort in, and the feebleminded whiners are never satisfied and refuse to put even the slightest bit of effort in themselves. That is frankly pathetic, as is any claim that ganking takes no effort.


This is just who they are. it's like real life. Something happens, someone screams "we need a law" and a law is passed, it happens again, people think "that didn't work, we need more laws" and more laws get passed" And again and again till half your population is in jail and it STILL happens because law was the wrong tool for the job, education, creativity and self reliance-knowing when and how to group with others in opposition would have been better tools.

The game has always had enough tool to totally defeat everything these people have complained about, yet they do nothing, because they don't want tools, they want fixes.

Quote:

The gankers are working their asses off to think up new strategies and perfecting them. The hapless victims just cry. Why can't the victims put even an ounce of effort — bloody or not — in towards preventing these trivially avoidable events?


The coolest thing about EVE is that you get to see human nature in action. You get to see what happens you you put creative, strong willed , ruthless self motivated people up against happless "victim mentality" entitled morons. Hilarity always follows, usually in fine ALOD form.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#69 - 2015-01-27 19:27:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So what you're saying is no, gankers should not have to put in effort. Only the defenders should have to.


Goonie tears best tears
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#70 - 2015-01-27 19:27:10 UTC
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2015-01-27 19:28:52 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So what you're saying is no, gankers should not have to put in effort. Only the defenders should have to.



No they definitely do, the key thing here is that no amount of tanking matters any more, if it is not active/regenerative.

It will be more economical to fit and rig it for warp speed and use a pair of guardians instead of traditional buffer.

or a mate in a daredevilBlink


Hyena is better. Some gates spit you out miles apart and that can be enough to get you bowled.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#72 - 2015-01-27 19:30:51 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So what you're saying is no, gankers should not have to put in effort. Only the defenders should have to.


I'm saying what I always say. The other guys 'effort' level has nothing to do with my reality. My reality is that I can choose to be a victim (in a video game) or I can choose to fight (with my mind parts) and not be a victim while watching gankers break against my tank like waves hitting a beach. How many buttons they click has crap-all to do with this reality.

The above is why i succeed and have no need to whine about gankers where as others....not so much.

The problem isn't EVE, its your mindset. You are too concerned with what others are doing and with ideas of 'fairness' that have no place in this video game we're playing for fun.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#73 - 2015-01-27 19:31:19 UTC
Eojek wrote:
A mechanic I would impliment is being auto-booted out of newbiecorp if that same account is constantly being used for piracy. The ganker would have to plop down 30 bucks for a new account as they ruined the reputation of their old account. More money for CCP's coffers.

A more severe measure is labeling an IP as pirate. The account or IP must eventually join a pirate corporation be forced start in Nulsec, and thereby, place the player in it's own natural environment of internet-spaceship hell.

I'm amazed CONCORD or empires don't impound ships, or even capsules, forcing the perma-pirate to clone-jump back to Nul-Sec. Yes the offender can dock, but they cannot gain benefit from a society who'se ideals the pirate themselves holds in contempt.

Friend, let me let you in on a secret: CCP put suicide ganking into the game on purpose! Yes, it's true!

CCP has spent a lot of work implementing the Crimewatch, security status, standings and CONCORD systems to allow highsec criminals engaging in piracy and general mayhem to make the game play more interesting. They are not going to start banning accounts for people engaging in intended game play.

This is a competitive sandbox set in a dystopian, war-plagued universe, not a peaceful, happy future where we all hold hands and get along. But don't worry, CCP has given you plenty of tools to protect yourself, so use them and actually play the game.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#74 - 2015-01-27 19:32:36 UTC
Concord Guy's Cousin wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
If we want the policy changed, all we have to do is hyperdunk Chribba in his Veldnaught...

CCP would reverse position on this faster than Concord could respond. Roll
Going by past occurrences of him being killed Chribba would probably say "GF" in local, and that would be the end of it as far as he's concerned.
Someone pulling this off using Catalysts would surely be getting a GF and tip of my hat in local.

While it wouldn't be much a display compared to a 200 pilot fleet doing an alpha...

(and if everyone pitched in perhaps even the Veldy and its wreck would become a permanent one yay \o/ Lol)

/c

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#75 - 2015-01-27 19:34:02 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Eojek wrote:
A mechanic I would impliment is being auto-booted out of newbiecorp if that same account is constantly being used for piracy. The ganker would have to plop down 30 bucks for a new account as they ruined the reputation of their old account. More money for CCP's coffers.

A more severe measure is labeling an IP as pirate. The account or IP must eventually join a pirate corporation be forced start in Nulsec, and thereby, place the player in it's own natural environment of internet-spaceship hell.

I'm amazed CONCORD or empires don't impound ships, or even capsules, forcing the perma-pirate to clone-jump back to Nul-Sec. Yes the offender can dock, but they cannot gain benefit from a society who'se ideals the pirate themselves holds in contempt.

Friend, let me let you in on a secret: CCP put suicide ganking into the game on purpose! Yes, it's true!

CCP has spent a lot of work implementing the Crimewatch, security status, standings and CONCORD systems to allow highsec criminals engaging in piracy and general mayhem to make the game play more interesting. They are not going to start banning accounts for people engaging in intended game play.

This is a competitive sandbox set in a dystopian, war-plagued universe, not a peaceful, happy future where we all hold hands and get along. But don't worry, CCP has given you plenty of tools to protect yourself, so use them and actually play the game.



Ahhh, that's so sweet, ole Black Pedro offering advice to people who want INTERVENTION not advice Cool
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#76 - 2015-01-27 19:34:15 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Tell me again how a buffer can help this.

Or do you fit barges with active tanks? >snicker<
Buffer tanking a barge works fine thanks. Even a lowly Retriever mining in a 0.5 can be fitted in a way that will thwart the efforts of a solo ganker in a T2 fitted Catalyst; if a ganker wants to kill one that's been fitted properly, it's going to cost them 2 Catalysts, at least one of which has to be T2 fitted.

That makes it an undesirable target, especially when there's plenty of miners out there who think a small shield booster is an effective tank.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#77 - 2015-01-27 19:36:12 UTC
Bumping just to harass someone is against the EULA. If you're getting ganked in this fashion and perpetually bumped, bring one pilot with any remote repair and negate the incoming damage. If they continue to bump you despite "losing" the gank, report them.


Problem solved!

Argent Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2015-01-27 19:39:55 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

Friend, let me let you in on a secret: CCP put suicide ganking into the game on purpose! Yes, it's true!

CCP has spent a lot of work implementing the Crimewatch, security status, standings and CONCORD systems to allow highsec criminals engaging in piracy and general mayhem to make the game play more interesting. They are not going to start banning accounts for people engaging in intended game play.

This is a competitive sandbox set in a dystopian, war-plagued universe, not a peaceful, happy future where we all hold hands and get along. But don't worry, CCP has given you plenty of tools to protect yourself, so use them and actually play the game.



I don't think any of those concerned about "hyperdunking" take issue with suicide ganking, rather it's the difficulty of forcefully stopping a neutral bump tackle and relatively small number of player accounts required to gank any ship that cause the concern.
Archeras Umangiar
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#79 - 2015-01-27 19:41:16 UTC
i love you falcon <3
Siegfried Cohenberg
Cohenberg's Ethical Hauling
Freighter Friends
#80 - 2015-01-27 19:54:11 UTC
My reign of terror has been given the ok.