These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Hyperdunking nerf on sisi, to the battlements!

First post First post
Author
Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
#701 - 2015-10-29 21:37:32 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. I didn't have any free character slots and deleted the character to make room for one that I was purchasing. What exactly is the issue here? Do you think I ought to have to tag up that character before I delete it so I can make room for my purchase?

Please spell these rules out for me so that I can more clearly break them for you.
To be fair it does seem fairly suspect that he was deleted shortly after getting past the -5 mark. I find it hard to believe that it just so happened to coincide with your need for for a new character, and undoubtedly you've found the space to roll a new aggro puller since then.

You are most certainly free to have your own theory on this situation, but I find it funny that there are cries of ganker recycling when there's really no hard evidence or proof as to why that character was deleted.
Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
#702 - 2015-10-29 21:39:09 UTC
Toxic Yaken wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. I didn't have any free character slots and deleted the character to make room for one that I was purchasing. What exactly is the issue here? Do you think I ought to have to tag up that character before I delete it so I can make room for my purchase?

Please spell these rules out for me so that I can more clearly break them for you.
To be fair it does seem fairly suspect that he was deleted shortly after getting past the -5 mark. I find it hard to believe that it just so happened to coincide with your need for for a new character, and undoubtedly you've found the space to roll a new aggro puller since then.


Faylee can I have your stuff?

I can let you hold on to maybe 30b
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#703 - 2015-10-29 21:54:22 UTC
Faylee Freir wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. I didn't have any free character slots and deleted the character to make room for one that I was purchasing. What exactly is the issue here? Do you think I ought to have to tag up that character before I delete it so I can make room for my purchase?

Please spell these rules out for me so that I can more clearly break them for you.
To be fair it does seem fairly suspect that he was deleted shortly after getting past the -5 mark. I find it hard to believe that it just so happened to coincide with your need for for a new character, and undoubtedly you've found the space to roll a new aggro puller since then.

You are most certainly free to have your own theory on this situation, but I find it funny that there are cries of ganker recycling when there's really no hard evidence or proof as to why that character was deleted.


Of course there's hard evidence - I read about it on the internets. Roll

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
#704 - 2015-10-29 22:02:49 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. I didn't have any free character slots and deleted the character to make room for one that I was purchasing. What exactly is the issue here? Do you think I ought to have to tag up that character before I delete it so I can make room for my purchase?

Please spell these rules out for me so that I can more clearly break them for you.
To be fair it does seem fairly suspect that he was deleted shortly after getting past the -5 mark. I find it hard to believe that it just so happened to coincide with your need for for a new character, and undoubtedly you've found the space to roll a new aggro puller since then.

You are most certainly free to have your own theory on this situation, but I find it funny that there are cries of ganker recycling when there's really no hard evidence or proof as to why that character was deleted.


Of course there's hard evidence - I read about it on the internets. Roll

I mean... if bears are allowed to dodge decs by dropping corp and hopping in another without any penalties, then we certainly should be allowed to recycle characters for any reason we see fit.
Austneal
Nero Fazione
#705 - 2015-10-29 22:10:13 UTC
Faylee Freir wrote:
I mean... if bears are allowed to dodge decs by dropping corp and hopping in another without any penalties, then we certainly should be allowed to recycle characters for any reason we see fit.

I'm pretty sure dec dodging isn't explicitly against the rules, as it is with gank alt recycling (correct me if I'm wrong here)
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#706 - 2015-10-29 22:39:26 UTC
Austneal wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
I mean... if bears are allowed to dodge decs by dropping corp and hopping in another without any penalties, then we certainly should be allowed to recycle characters for any reason we see fit.

I'm pretty sure dec dodging isn't explicitly against the rules, as it is with gank alt recycling (correct me if I'm wrong here)


Dodging was an exploit, now it isn't. It should be, if for no other reason than it was (though there are other reasons), just like the whole MTU thing wasn't an exploit to start with and that shouldn't have been reversed. Level of use has no bearing on whether or not something is right or wrong, but sadly CCP have a history of caving to whinebears who want Eve to be not-Eve.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#707 - 2015-10-29 22:44:12 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Dodging was an exploit, now it isn't. It should be, if for no other reason than it was (though there are other reasons), just like the whole MTU thing wasn't an exploit to start with and that shouldn't have been reversed. Level of use has no bearing on whether or not something is right or wrong, but sadly CCP have a history of caving to whinebears who want Eve to be not-Eve.
No it wasn't. It was never an exploit. Feel free to find the dev blog or post confirming otherwise. This is another one of these times that you guys have made stuff up to make you seem hard done by.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Toxic Yaken
Slavers Union
Something Really Pretentious
#708 - 2015-10-29 23:06:12 UTC
Faylee Freir wrote:
Toxic Yaken wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Faylee Freir wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. I didn't have any free character slots and deleted the character to make room for one that I was purchasing. What exactly is the issue here? Do you think I ought to have to tag up that character before I delete it so I can make room for my purchase?

Please spell these rules out for me so that I can more clearly break them for you.
To be fair it does seem fairly suspect that he was deleted shortly after getting past the -5 mark. I find it hard to believe that it just so happened to coincide with your need for for a new character, and undoubtedly you've found the space to roll a new aggro puller since then.


Faylee can I have your stuff?

I can let you hold on to maybe 30b


That's a lot of gank thrashers...

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs

Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
#709 - 2015-10-30 12:59:33 UTC
You heard it here first folks, dodging wardecs is now an exploit and is a bannable offense.

Source
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#710 - 2015-10-30 19:12:00 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
admiral root wrote:
Dodging was an exploit, now it isn't. It should be, if for no other reason than it was (though there are other reasons), just like the whole MTU thing wasn't an exploit to start with and that shouldn't have been reversed. Level of use has no bearing on whether or not something is right or wrong, but sadly CCP have a history of caving to whinebears who want Eve to be not-Eve.
No it wasn't. It was never an exploit. Feel free to find the dev blog or post confirming otherwise. This is another one of these times that you guys have made stuff up to make you seem hard done by.

Out of interest I did some research and it turns out that it’s the same urban legend as when they claimed that spawning CONCORD for defensive purposes was supposedly an exploit (as opposed to when gankers do it of course, lol) which was quickly debunked by posting earlier rulings which in turn were officially reaffirmed by Lead GM Lelouch shortly after.

The earliest threads I could find on eve-search.com date back to 2004. Result:

There isn’t a single shred of evidence that dropping corp or reforming a corp during a wardec in order to permanently avoid it have ever been considered to be exploits, quite the contrary actually.

I couldn’t find a single post from a dev or GM that touches this in one way or another. What I found however were two types of posts:

1. Wardeccers finding out that it was in fact NOT an exploit (see http://eve-search.com/thread/481519-0/#1 and http://eve-search.com/thread/481519-0/page/1#20 e.g.)

2. Wardeccers using the same cheap scare tactics as they do now: telling people that this or that is an exploit. When being asked for any proof they either mysteriously vanish from the thread or it’s the same crap as it is today: "oh, I can’t be arsed to look it up right now, but but but trust me, it’s an exploit. And if this isn’t an exploit, then that other special case there is an exploit. promise! double-swear!" (see http://eve-search.com/thread/498579-0/page/2#49 and http://eve-search.com/thread/498579-0/page/3#75 the whole thread is very entertaining in that regard, also http://eve-search.com/thread/350276-0/page/1 ).

I found one edge case regarding evading a wardec that apparently was an exploit at the time (which is impossible nowadays and as such a fix for the wardeccers): drop corp, run away from the enemy a few systems, rejoin same corp again: http://eve-search.com/thread/102160-0/page/1#8 e.g.

Otherwise a lot of whining that people dodge wars, basically the same as today. It’s actually quite interesting to read in these old threads as you could copy&paste many of them into today’s forum and you wouldn’t even notice the difference.

While I’m at it: a shout-out to Chribba for making this archive available!

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !

Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#711 - 2015-10-30 19:25:44 UTC
The only exploit I have ever heard about in reference to dropping corp during a wardec was when you could drop corp while in space. Basically, if you have no roles or titles you can drop corp immediately. It used to be that you did not need to be docked to drop corp. So what would happen is one of your opponents would drop corp while you were pursuing them, and when you went to shoot them, CONCORD would kill you; because they were no longer a valid target. Because you know in the heat of battle, you don't really bother to check if they are still in the same corp they were in a minute ago.
Tyyler DURden
Mordechai and Sons Distribution Co.
#712 - 2015-10-30 19:31:59 UTC
[/quote] Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. [/quote]
A small point here, perhaps you could clarify a bit further. My ganking experience is limited, but in my understanding the act of pulling Concord must be done by every character that participates in the gank and then again after the completion of the gank to prepare for the next attempt. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that point.

So.. Based on my assumption's above being accurate, if you were using that character to pull Concord off grid then that was in preparation of that character participating in another gank attempt.

This is the first time I've heard of a character used for the sole purpose of Concord manipulation and even if what you say is the truth I don't think it matters how the sec status of the character got into the negative.

Perhaps someone could come along and clarify this.

Tyyler DURden says "use soap"

Paranoid Loyd
#713 - 2015-10-30 19:35:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
With regards to hyperdunking, having another puller saves the time of warping off grid and back with the DPS character.

I have a puller for moving Concord when someone else leaves a gate dirty or gets butt hurt and purposely pulls Concord to the gate. You don't want your ganker flashy if a target comes along.

It's not a gamebreaker if it goes below -5, it just means it gets considerably more difficult to time things properly.

"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!

Leto Thule
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#714 - 2015-10-30 20:35:34 UTC
Tyyler DURden wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. [/quote]
A small point here, perhaps you could clarify a bit further. My ganking experience is limited, but in my understanding the act of pulling Concord must be done by every character that participates in the gank and then again after the completion of the gank to prepare for the next attempt. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that point.

So.. Based on my assumption's above being accurate, if you were using that character to pull Concord off grid then that was in preparation of that character participating in another gank attempt.

This is the first time I've heard of a character used for the sole purpose of Concord manipulation and even if what you say is the truth I don't think it matters how the sec status of the character got into the negative.

Perhaps someone could come along and clarify this.[/quote]

I'd also like to know this...

Thunderdome ringmaster, Community Leader and Lord Inquisitor to the Court of Crime and Punishment

Black Pedro
Mine.
#715 - 2015-10-30 21:06:04 UTC
Tyyler DURden wrote:
Quote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid.

A small point here, perhaps you could clarify a bit further. My ganking experience is limited, but in my understanding the act of pulling Concord must be done by every character that participates in the gank and then again after the completion of the gank to prepare for the next attempt. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that point.

So.. Based on my assumption's above being accurate, if you were using that character to pull Concord off grid then that was in preparation of that character participating in another gank attempt.

This is the first time I've heard of a character used for the sole purpose of Concord manipulation and even if what you say is the truth I don't think it matters how the sec status of the character got into the negative.

Perhaps someone could come along and clarify this.

No. You just need to pull CONCORD with an equal number of players for the number of CONCORD instances that have spawned, not the exact same characters.

Let's try to explain this way: Right after downtime there are zero CONCORD spawns in every system. If you commit a criminal act by yourself, one CONCORD will spawn and destroy you. From then on, if another single person commits a criminal act in that system, that original CONCORD spawn will warp to the new location. If two people simultaneously commit a criminal act, the first CONCORD spawn will warp to them, and a second new CONCORD will spawn and together they will kill the offenders. Now, if later a single ganker commits a criminal act, only one of these two CONCORD spawns will warp to the site of the offense, and the original will stay in the same place.

It is not important who originally spawned CONCORD - any criminal can move them. But it is important that at least the same number of criminals undock/go criminal at the same time in order that all the CONCORD spawns are moved. This is why gankers pull together after each gank to make each and every spawn is off the gate. However, if you are just a single ganker and you know there is only one CONCORD spawned in system (or if there is multiple you can move the closest), you can move them around with another character.
Philipa
Doomheim
#716 - 2015-10-30 21:06:45 UTC
Manipulating CONCORD is based on the number of criminal ships.

If you use 1 gank ship, you pull once in pod, can be same character or different.
If you use X gank ships, you pull once all in pods, simultaneously.
If you pull while your gank ship is still alive, you spawn another CONCORD or pull another CONCORD from different part of the system, and you have to get rid of it.

As for security status - If your ganker is dedicated it does not matter. For the puller it never matters. What matters is to have the criminal flag.
Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
#717 - 2015-10-30 21:17:38 UTC
Tyyler DURden wrote:
Yeah so like I said I had a character that I used for pulling concord off grid. [/quote]
A small point here, perhaps you could clarify a bit further. My ganking experience is limited, but in my understanding the act of pulling Concord must be done by every character that participates in the gank and then again after the completion of the gank to prepare for the next attempt. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that point.

So.. Based on my assumption's above being accurate, if you were using that character to pull Concord off grid then that was in preparation of that character participating in another gank attempt.

This is the first time I've heard of a character used for the sole purpose of Concord manipulation and even if what you say is the truth I don't think it matters how the sec status of the character got into the negative.

Perhaps someone could come along and clarify this.[/quote]
This is why it's laughable that someone would think that I recycled my "ganking alt" that was literally only used to pull concord. All I needed to do to pull concord was undock and shoot the station, dock up, board noobship, undock and let concord kill me... Poof! Concord is pulled. So how does going -5 make that harder in any way?

You can also pull while in space... Lets assume the freighter is in his ewarp safe and logged off. Warp an Orca / Bowhead to a safe around 250km from the freighter and either jettison shuttles there or leave the orca / bowhead there from the puller to pull directly from the bay. You go GCC by shooting a station / player / however you want, then you warp your pod to the orca / bowhead and board a shuttle. Once you board a shuttle and concord has killed you, you can board a bomber with your ganker and start shooting. Once your ganker has been killed by concord and is sitting in his pod, you can board another shuttle with your puller.

So being -5 literally has no effect on how easy it is to do this. Try again space-nerds.
Faylee Freir
Abusing Game Mechanics
#718 - 2015-10-30 21:21:26 UTC
Philipa wrote:
Manipulating CONCORD is based on the number of criminal ships.

If you use 1 gank ship, you pull once in pod, can be same character or different.
If you use X gank ships, you pull once all in pods, simultaneously.
If you pull while your gank ship is still alive, you spawn another CONCORD or pull another CONCORD from different part of the system, and you have to get rid of it.

As for security status - If your ganker is dedicated it does not matter. For the puller it never matters. What matters is to have the criminal flag.

Alternatively you and I know ways to "fix" concord if we accidently pull or board a bomber too quickly, resulting in an extra spawn of concord. Those uninformed would love to know how, but I'll leave your poor imagination running in circles... All you have to do is DESPAWN concord. Woah, mind blown!

This too is actually a mechanic that can make gate ganking and even freighter ganking potentially harder and unprofitable. I'll leave you guys to figure that one out though.
Tyyler DURden
Mordechai and Sons Distribution Co.
#719 - 2015-10-30 22:27:10 UTC
Thanks for all the reply's about the Concord pulling mechanic.
In Faylee's situation however I doubt ccp cares whether or not the recycled character in question was a "ganker alt " or a Concord pulling alt. I certainly don't see any distinction when it comes to recycling character's with neg sec status.

Tyyler DURden says "use soap"

Mevath Sagald
Doomheim
#720 - 2015-10-31 00:36:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mevath Sagald
Here are some more insights on Hyperdunking/Ganking mechanics - https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3qxtwb/hyperdunking_machariels_fun_and_iskies/