These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Paranoid Loyd
#541 - 2015-01-31 04:51:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
you can't dock at any high sec faction warfare station either.
Since when? Oh, are talking about mechanics you don't understand again?


I mean, those guys who camp Hek are there almost every day. This is not some secret.

Not to mention a whine thread is usually open
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=395372&find=unread

"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!

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#542 - 2015-01-31 04:52:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Actually that isn't true, you can't dock at any high sec faction warfare station either. But I do believe I specifically said low-sec anyways.

Then it doesn't matter, because there are no free-roam faction navies in low-sec. And also plenty of non-FW stations everywhere.

PS: Source on the bolded part?

Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Regardless, why is being hunted by two empires harder to deal with than being hunted by all four? I don't want to hear that crap from Tippy again about how easy FW is to deal with, or have someone tell me I need to be -10 to see for myself. There is no risk in flying around in a pod and having safe alts drop your ships for you.

Except that's pretty much the limit of what you can do. You can get into dropped ships for a short duration of time, and that's it. Every other high-sec activity aside from station trading is pretty much cut off from you.

Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Again, no one -10 should be docking at any high sec station. Why would any of the empires harbor criminals?

Because the empires don't see them as criminals.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#543 - 2015-01-31 04:52:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Dangeresque Too
Even if I edit this post it still comes out as what seems to be a random post pulled from somewhere else on the forums and doesn't match what is in the message of the post that was typed.... kinda puzzled here:

"
Preview:
EU, US, AU tz - -> Cynosural Edge <- - Recruitment
"

Ok, now its working, so this is just a duplicate/broken forum post.
Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#544 - 2015-01-31 05:08:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Dangeresque Too
I had a nice response typed up but then the forums ate it entirely and spit out garbage.... grrr (the one time I don't copy/paste into notepad before clicking the button)
baltec1 wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
True, but the consequence of negative sec status is barely worth mentioning.

If perhaps you were unable to dock in high-sec past -5 or unable to perform market transactions in high sec... now we are talking consequence.
Drop your sec status down to -10 then go and do what you normally do. You can then come back an tell us how it went.
Except that most -10 pilots don't want to do the things that PvE carebears do, so they could care less if they can't do them with bad sec status. So by not wanting to do something and not caring if you can even do it really matter in the discussion of you saying you can't do it? If you wanted to you would easily correct your sec status and keep it high enough to do what you wanted. But as most -10's usually admit, they don't care and don't want to do the things carebears do, so not really a consequence. They don't want to fix their sec status, which means they don't need/want to do what higher sec status people do.

But back on topic here...

Concord is sending mixed messages here, and it seems CCP isn't exactly on the same page with what they want to happen and how the system works. A great example of why this doesn't make sense when taken into account with other Concord actions. If you previously ejected from a ship at the spot where you gank someone, Concord will vaporize the empty ship along with your active one. If you leave an empty ship somewhere else and try to board it under the criminal flag, Concord tells you no: "That ship, or its owner, are currently engaged with local police forces. CONCORD prohibits you from boarding it until the engagement is over.".

But somehow it is OK to board someone else's ship where you did your gank, with the exception that Concord will insta pop you after boarding the new ship without going somewhere else first. And if you do go somewhere else first before boarding someone else's ship, its somehow OK now? Like they are saying "You can't do it here but if you just go over there you can and we will give you some more time, just not right here". The only reason "Hyperdunking" works is because Concord seems to forget you are an active criminal if you are 150k or further away from where you performed your last criminal action or if you board a ship that doesn't belong to you. That is what makes this smell of non-intended/exploited mechanic.

So then what is your translation of Concord not letting you board one of your own ships in space if being able to infinitely re-ship and continue a gank is an intended feature? Why should you have to bother going through the trouble of using other peoples ships or moving away just to come back again?
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#545 - 2015-01-31 05:20:29 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:
Except that most -10 pilots don't want to do the things that PvE carebears do, so they could care less if they can't do them with bad sec status. So by not wanting to do something and not caring if you can even do it really matter in the discussion of you saying you can't do it?

Yes, it does. Objectively so.

Dangeresque Too wrote:
If you previously ejected from a ship at the spot where you gank someone, Concord will vaporize the empty ship along with your active one.

The ganker isn't the one leaving the ships out.

Dangeresque Too wrote:
If you leave an empty ship somewhere else and try to board it under the criminal flag, Concord tells you no: "That ship, or its owner, are currently engaged with local police forces. CONCORD prohibits you from boarding it until the engagement is over."

Right. This lasts for the duration of CONCORD shooting the criminal, not for the duration of the GCC flag.

Dangeresque Too wrote:
But somehow it is OK to board someone else's ship where you did your gank, with the exception that Concord will insta pop you after boarding the new ship without going somewhere else first. And if you do go somewhere else first before boarding someone else's ship, its somehow OK now? Like they are saying "You can't do it here but if you just go over there you can and we will give you some more time, just not right here".

CONCORD doesn't follow criminal pods around. Why should they? Pods are harmless. If they weren't, CONCORD would destroy them too.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#546 - 2015-01-31 05:44:52 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:
Except that most -10 pilots don't want to do the things that PvE carebears do, so they could care less if they can't do them with bad sec status.


So what? That doesn't mean that the consequence isn't there, it just means that they accept it and deal with it.




Quote:
So then what is your translation of Concord not letting you board one of your own ships in space if being able to infinitely re-ship and continue a gank is an intended feature? Why should you have to bother going through the trouble of using other peoples ships or moving away just to come back again?


Do you know how the game's ownership token system works? Because it really seems like you don't.

"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.

Hope Alar
Blue Tridents
#547 - 2015-01-31 06:06:45 UTC
I don't see the logic in allowing one guy with 8 catalysts gank a freighter worth far more than his catalysts are worth. How is this avoidable if the pilot were at the keyboard? He has a parner/alt bumping the freighter off, and if the freighter logs off he is dead. You cannot warp off due to the bumping and iirc you cannot safe log because you now have an aggression timer. So if a pilot absolutely wants to kill your freighter for a pittance compared to the ship, there is nothing stopping him? He just has to throw more ships at it.

This is a bad decision.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#548 - 2015-01-31 06:10:46 UTC
Hope Alar wrote:
I don't see the logic in allowing one guy with 8 catalysts gank a freighter worth far more than his catalysts are worth. How is this avoidable if the pilot were at the keyboard? He has a parner/alt bumping the freighter off, and if the freighter logs off he is dead. You cannot warp off due to the bumping and iirc you cannot safe log because you now have an aggression timer. So if a pilot absolutely wants to kill your freighter for a pittance compared to the ship, there is nothing stopping him? He just has to throw more ships at it.

This is a bad decision.


Literally every sentence is wrong.

Impressive.

"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.

David Mandrake
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#549 - 2015-01-31 06:29:20 UTC  |  Edited by: David Mandrake
Dangeresque Too wrote:
Except that most -10 pilots don't want to do the things that PvE carebears do


True, but at the same time, it's not entirely easy moving around highsec when you've got a bunch of people that want to shoot you (try going suspect and see what happens). Fact is this does leave them open to punitive action if you actually want to put in the effort to do it, because even if they decide to only use their capsules/shuttles/instawarping interceptors to move around, eventually they're going to have to board that gank ship, and those ships are fit to kill things, not to enter warp quickly. Sure, they can do it relatively quickly but if you're fast enough, you could still catch one and blow it up (since they're also not fit for tank). Even with their larger Catalyst fleets, I'm not entirely sure why you couldn't have an alt with combat scan probes out near where they're going to be operating so you can instantly get a fix on them and have a smartbombing battleship set up to warp in on them and go blow them all up (might be stupid, but just something that poped in my head of "how do you deal with a bunch of non-tanky ships all grouped together?), or even play the long game and just make note of where their safespots and instaundocks are in their favorite ganking systems and lay a trap for them. Sure it takes effort to do it, but if you want to fight other players you're going to have to put some sort of effort in to it. It's not like fighting NPCs or anything like that where everything is set in stone and defined for you; you're fighting real, thinking people that don't want to get caught by you and thus you're going to have to figure out how to catch them. It can be done - you've just got to try hard enough.

Quote:
That is what makes this smell of non-intended/exploited mechanic.


There are plenty of non-intended mechanics. That doesn't mean they're bad, and entire playstyles have come out of them - living in W-space, for example, was never intended. One great unintended mechanic you might want to look at is webbing your freighter in to warp; it can make it almost impossible to actually bump, and unless you've actually done something to really make it worth the effort, most ganking groups are not going to bother chasing you, they'll just go for the guy after you that's autopiloting.

Hope Alar wrote:
I don't see the logic in allowing one guy with 8 catalysts gank a freighter worth far more than his catalysts are worth. How is this avoidable if the pilot were at the keyboard? He has a parner/alt bumping the freighter off, and if the freighter logs off he is dead. You cannot warp off due to the bumping and iirc you cannot safe log because you now have an aggression timer. So if a pilot absolutely wants to kill your freighter for a pittance compared to the ship, there is nothing stopping him? He just has to throw more ships at it.

This is a bad decision.


Several different ways; one thing is that actually keeping you bumped is a bit more difficult (assuming they're actually doing it and not having banked on your autopilot shutting down when they scrammed you, which does happen), and thus they may wind up having to bump you towards something you can warp to, thus allowing you to warp to it. They've now got to chase you, rebump you, pick up their remaining catalysts, warp that ship to you, and then set the whole thing up again and hope they don't bump you in a way that you can warp out again; which again is difficult at the best of times, and likely moreso when they have to keep you near their Catalysts (as the instant they board one CONCORD will immediately begin moving to blow up their ship again and thus every second getting in range of your freighter is wasted time).

Additionally if you have an alt webbing you - something that's very much recommended nowadays, particularly if you're going to be flying ships around whose hulls alone are worth more than a billion ISK (imagine a dude complaining that they shouldn't have to have a cyno character on another account to move their carrier around; those cost about as much as a freighter nowadays) - it's not a long train to put them in to a Catalyst, and then you can simply board the catalysts and steal them by warping them to a station, docking up, warping back and stealing more, or just simply sacrifice the webbing ship by setting safeties red, webbing the nearest illegal target, getting CONCORDED, and then board every Catalyst as quickly as the game allows you to and have them all the blown up too. Or have the webber capable of targeting several ships at once and just lock all the Catalysts, which means they can't be boarded or scooped up, essentially rendering them worthless. Assuming they actually catch you when you have a webbing alt - I've had my freighter just about do a 180 degree warp with a pair of meta 4 webs from a Cruor; unless you managed to get insanely lucky with the placement of your Machariel and are right on top of it/can immediately bump it, you're not going to catch it. And assuming you jump in to a bumping trap; before I undock my freighter I hit up Dotlan and plug in my intended route to see if there's anything that looks like freighter ganking has been going on, and then take a look at any systems that seem suspicious. If there's a problem, I can either avoid it or not take the trip. Add the radar feature on top of that, liberal use of safespots and scouting, and hauling in highsec is stupid safe to do.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#550 - 2015-01-31 06:43:29 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:
First off, this thread keeps referring to them leaving grid... and they don't actually have to leave grid to pull this off, they just leave some shuttles far enough away to cause Concord to have to warp, thereby buying themselves a max response time from Concord. And from what I have been able to gather, there was stated somewhere a list of acceptable ways to manipulate Concord:

"a. Suicide gank. CONCORD is spawned because Player A attacks Player B without the rights to do so.
b. Defensive spawning. CONCORD is spawned because Player A's alt character attacks Player A without the rights to do so."

But neither of these situations cover the criminal pilot warping off in a pod and getting into a ship elsewhere (same grid or at another station etc). So maybe the rules for what is allowed in terms of manipulating Concord should be revised? Because in "Hyperdunking" they are moving Concord away from the site of criminal action without the use of illegal aggression. Therein allowing them to warp back to the gank site and re-ship next to their target, taking no additional security penalty for continued aggression and a freshly restarted timer.

Yes, I know, everyone who is doing this keeps saying "But I'm criminal, you can shoot me"... yes, but, I have to find you first, then I have to get there before you finish the gank, and then I have to lock you and either blow you up or jam you before you kill your target or hit me instead. And with this new 'feature' of being able to re-ship infinitely you can just shoot me until you kill me (re-shipping after each attempt) and then you can go back to shooting your original target. Even if I tanked you indefinitely, you would just wait for me to get bored of waiting and leave and then continue the hit.

Further, if the ganker does this right, there is no actual chance to steal the replacement ships before they get into them or their Concord moving shuttles. If they do it right. But most don't from what I have seen, though the ones that don't do this 100% safely for them still usually have a spare gank pilot in a cata sitting around ready to counter gank anyone that tries to either steal their empty catas or shuttle.

Even further, with the ability to lock people out of boarding a ship that isn't theirs all they have to do is target it, so the spare gank pilot and orca pilots just have to keep a lock on their shuttles/spare catas to keep passby's or white knights from flying off with them.

As a final point, to be quite honest, nearly everyone I've seen doing this is already -10 anyways, so that further nullifies the "omg I can't do anything cause my sec status is so low" argument that -10 pilots always seem to make, yeah its so dangerous and so inconvenient you can kill any target you want anywhere you want.

But really though, the people that are doing this haven't quite realized the full potential of this. You can clear an entire system of miners in one go with this, just fill a bowhead with cata's and have it warp to the next victim as soon as you start on the current one. If you failed to kill the guy in the first pass just have the bowhead warp back and hit him again. Yeah, done correctly this requires 4 pilots if using just 1 gank ship, but that doesn't make it legit just because they have to multibox 4 accounts that may or may not belong to them (account sharing anyone?).



Why do you care so much about what gankers do, and whether or not its 'too easy' or not?

Aren't you the guy that claimed he 'just wanted to salvage freighter wrecks' in an interceptor? You were so scandalized (and demanded explanations from CCP) when you discovered you couldn't destroy freighter loot - in complete safety - with salvagers? Because, I guess, blasting the wreck (or stealing the loot) and getting a flag is too scary?

Now you are here whining about how 'easy' gankers have it? Wow.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#551 - 2015-01-31 06:47:46 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Hope Alar wrote:
I don't see the logic in allowing one guy with 8 catalysts gank a freighter worth far more than his catalysts are worth. How is this avoidable if the pilot were at the keyboard? He has a parner/alt bumping the freighter off, and if the freighter logs off he is dead. You cannot warp off due to the bumping and iirc you cannot safe log because you now have an aggression timer. So if a pilot absolutely wants to kill your freighter for a pittance compared to the ship, there is nothing stopping him? He just has to throw more ships at it.

This is a bad decision.


Literally every sentence is wrong.

Impressive.


In all justice, the first part of the first sentence is spot on.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#552 - 2015-01-31 08:41:45 UTC
Look, let's look at this discussion from first principles.

Here we have people saying that "hyperdunking" is bad because the freighter pilot is left with no way to escape.

Here we have people who knowingly fly a ship that is literally the biggest, clumsiest and slowest ship it is possible to fly in hi-sec. They are further aware that it has no high slots (ergo no DPS) and no medium slots (ergo no EW). And only 3 low slots, so it can be tackled by any ship that can outmanoeuvre it (ie: everything) and that can apply 4 points or more of warp disruption (ie: everything except that one Amarr ship that only has 1 mid, I forget the name).

Can one of these people explain to me what choices they expected to have in any game-legal PvP situation?

Because from reading this thread, it is difficult to avoid the unpleasant suspicion that the not very well hidden subtext here is that a freighter pilot in an NPC corp shouldn't be a legal target at all.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#553 - 2015-01-31 08:43:40 UTC
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Dave stark
#554 - 2015-01-31 09:06:40 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?


a webbing alt doesn't show up on a kill mail, i'm afraid.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#555 - 2015-01-31 09:08:03 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?


a webbing alt doesn't show up on a kill mail, i'm afraid.


Shouldn't the web alt show up on the list of aggressing ships?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#556 - 2015-01-31 11:09:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?

Just FYI they can't fit WCs. Not enough CPU.

Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?


a webbing alt doesn't show up on a kill mail, i'm afraid.


Shouldn't the web alt show up on the list of aggressing ships?

Yes, it will. Any form of in-system aggression will. Even something like a target painter.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Dave stark
#557 - 2015-01-31 11:12:32 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?


a webbing alt doesn't show up on a kill mail, i'm afraid.


Shouldn't the web alt show up on the list of aggressing ships?


If the webbing alt was present, there wouldn't be a killmail!
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#558 - 2015-01-31 11:33:17 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?


a webbing alt doesn't show up on a kill mail, i'm afraid.


Shouldn't the web alt show up on the list of aggressing ships?


If the webbing alt was present, there wouldn't be a killmail!


I see what you mean. Well that was kind of my point.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#559 - 2015-01-31 11:35:53 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Also can anyone point out a hyperdunked freighter killmail where the freighter has any modules that might even slightly help it to escape? WCS? Istab?

Just FYI they can't fit WCs. Not enough CPU


There you go then. In any combat situation, there is no reason for a solo freighter pilot to have any expectation of doing anything except dying. Freighters should travel in groups with escorts, or risk being ganked.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#560 - 2015-01-31 11:48:46 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

Shouldn't the web alt show up on the list of aggressing ships?

Depends....
If they alpha the web alt and it's been more than 15 minutes, no. So Kill mails aren't 100% reliable on that front.