These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Hi Sec Mack gankers?

Author
Helicity Boson
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#21 - 2011-12-28 00:20:07 UTC
I think he intends for Shadow Cartel to win at Hulkageddon for once*















*AND THEN FOR ME TO BE ACCUSED OF CHEATING >_<
Thomas Gore
Blackfyre Enterprise
#22 - 2011-12-28 11:09:37 UTC
Incoming in new patch: CONCORD response time cut in one tenth.
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#23 - 2011-12-28 12:17:22 UTC
Helicity Boson wrote:
I think he intends for Shadow Cartel to win at Hulkageddon for once*















*AND THEN FOR ME TO BE ACCUSED OF CHEATING >_<



NEVAR, we will defend our E honour most ferociously. Pirate

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome

nooblete
Doomheim
#24 - 2012-01-03 00:37:45 UTC
So in actual fact all I learned here is that negative security status doesn't matter?
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#25 - 2012-01-03 05:00:44 UTC
nooblete wrote:
So in actual fact all I learned here is that negative security status doesn't matter?


Have you ever tried to mine in high sec with negative ten sec status?
Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-01-03 13:30:31 UTC
Mutnin wrote:
nooblete wrote:
So in actual fact all I learned here is that negative security status doesn't matter?


Have you ever tried to mine in high sec with negative ten sec status?



Thats how you mine like a boss
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#27 - 2012-01-03 14:38:07 UTC
Thomas Gore wrote:
Incoming in new patch: CONCORD response time cut in one tenth.


Incoming in new patch: people learn about high-alpha ships one-shotting targets.

"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.
#28 - 2012-01-03 14:39:41 UTC
nooblete wrote:
So in actual fact all I learned here is that negative security status doesn't matter?


It does matter, it just doesn't work like a lot of people assume it does.

Speaking of assumptions, hi-sec is not and was never supposed to be "safe". Merely "safer".

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
#29 - 2012-01-03 15:11:23 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
nooblete wrote:
So in actual fact all I learned here is that negative security status doesn't matter?


It does matter, it just doesn't work like a lot of people assume it does.

Speaking of assumptions, hi-sec is not and was never supposed to be "safe". Merely "safer".



That in itself is a pretty big assumption

Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .

Bumble's Space Log

Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2012-01-04 06:00:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Smodab Ongalot
Bumblefck wrote:

That in itself is a pretty big assumption


Not really. The mere fact that game mechanics permit us to perform high sec ganks in the first place would imply that the game designers did not intend empire space to have absolute security.

If indeed absolute security was the intent, the game would simply prevent my guns from firing in the first place.

Duh.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#31 - 2012-01-04 12:03:38 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:

That in itself is a pretty big assumption


Not really. The mere fact that game mechanics permit us to perform high sec ganks in the first place would imply that the game designers did not intend empire space to have absolute security.

If indeed absolute security was the intent, the game would simply prevent my guns from firing in the first place.

Duh.


Hi sec is not meant to be safer (it can't), but just to bring punishment on those who make it unsafe.

In fact the above "exercise of destruction" would be just fine except if you are using ways to circumvent game mechanics.

I.e. if it works, I find it fishy at best to take Concord away, it's staying was meant to implement diminishing returns into a freshly suicide ganked area.

Also, if this "farm way" of grinding dozens ships in short time goes mainstream, expect some nerf. Don't overdo it, else it'll probably be taken away.
Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2012-01-04 13:34:36 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

In fact the above "exercise of destruction" would be just fine except if you are using ways to circumvent game mechanics.

I.e. if it works, I find it fishy at best to take Concord away, it's staying was meant to implement diminishing returns into a freshly suicide ganked area.

Also, if this "farm way" of grinding dozens ships in short time goes mainstream, expect some nerf. Don't overdo it, else it'll probably be taken away.


We aren't doing anything that Goons, or any other ganker that used a tower or Orca to supply ships in space, hadn't done or posted instructions about before.

The only difference is that we are much better at it! Twisted
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2012-01-04 18:32:55 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:

That in itself is a pretty big assumption


Not really. The mere fact that game mechanics permit us to perform high sec ganks in the first place would imply that the game designers did not intend empire space to have absolute security.

If indeed absolute security was the intent, the game would simply prevent my guns from firing in the first place.

Duh.


Hi sec is not meant to be safer (it can't), but just to bring punishment on those who make it unsafe.

In fact the above "exercise of destruction" would be just fine except if you are using ways to circumvent game mechanics.

I.e. if it works, I find it fishy at best to take Concord away, it's staying was meant to implement diminishing returns into a freshly suicide ganked area.

Also, if this "farm way" of grinding dozens ships in short time goes mainstream, expect some nerf. Don't overdo it, else it'll probably be taken away.


By this logic, smartbombs would have been outlawed in hisec years ago.
foxnod
Perkone
Caldari State
#34 - 2012-01-05 01:22:20 UTC  |  Edited by: foxnod
There you have it. Proof that 90% of ice miners are bots.
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#35 - 2012-01-05 09:53:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Kara Books
first thoughts that come to mind:

Booster
Tech 2 ammo
boosters

Edit:
also notable to mention that different systems with different security status in highsec have different concord intervention times.
Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-01-05 15:03:23 UTC
Kara Books wrote:

also notable to mention that different systems with different security status in highsec have different concord intervention times.


If you can get 3 people and t1 fit catalysts, nothing else matters. You can happily destroy mackinaws all day long while ignoring your GCC. The newly buffed catalyst does soooo much damage, it is in a league of it's own.

A whole new era of industrial terrorism is upon us. Twisted
Jeicam Mmis
BEEFCO.
#37 - 2012-01-05 23:05:50 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
I have video for the masses:

http://vimeo.com/33894168


inspiring. Best I can do is 6/hr but you've given me some ideas here. +1 :)
Previous page12