These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Miners and Indies need to step up

First post
Author
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#61 - 2016-09-01 16:13:48 UTC
For those not familiar with how this works.....

There are only 2 actual people on here arguing both sides of the argument. You see deep immersion space fanatics get a little board sometimes, create their own personal troll threads and then argue with themselves.
Caco De'mon
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#62 - 2016-09-01 16:27:02 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
For those not familiar with how this works.....

There are only 2 actual people on here arguing both sides of the argument. You see deep immersion space fanatics get a little board sometimes, create their own personal troll threads and then argue with themselves.



Actually TBH, Serendipity is my main....there, I said it...

*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#63 - 2016-09-01 18:03:58 UTC
Khan Tzestu wrote:
The time for waiting for someone else to do it for you is over. Take the fight to them, or be their you know what for the rest of your eve life.

Not the regular "someone do something!". More like a "time for waiting that someone does something is over. Now someone do something!".
Bing Bangboom
DAMAG Safety Commission
#64 - 2016-09-01 18:09:30 UTC
If miners would just do as we tell them and follow the Code they would have many fewer issues with bumping and ganking. For FOUR years now (the New Order is 4 years old) we have consistently said the same thing. Following the Code will make you a better miner, a better player and yes, a better person.

Miners who get ganked have chosen otherwise. This is the nature of free will. But choices have consequences and becoming a rapidly expanding ball of gas is the consequence of not follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct. You have to understand that all this debating, amazingly simultaneous, arguments that 1) CODE. is irrelevant and 2) CCP needs to massively change the game to stop us, is completely beside the point. We are going to do what we choose to do and all the changes that have occured, all the bannings that CCP has hit our members with and all the caterwauling that take place in the forums have ZERO impact on Code enforcement. We just keep on keepin' on and the ships explode and the miners wail and the forum alts posture.

I destroyed four miners last night in an hour and a half of intermittent gameplay. It wasn't hard, it wasn't unusual for me and I've done it for four straight years. Because I believe that highsec mining ruins Eve. Argue with me all you want but I've never seen a demand of the miners that wouldn't and sadly enough, hasn't actually made the game safer, less interesting, and in my judgement, less popular. Highsec mining is literally killing Eve. There is no place for someone who will undock in an untanked ship, siddle up next to an ice block, start the lasers and then go do the laundry. Not while we are around anyway.

If you disagree, GREAT! Do something about it. The fact that no one has been able to even slow us down will make your success shine all the brighter if you can figure something out. (Obligatory: YOU do something about it, not demand somebody else, like CCP, do it). People have tried in the past. Interestingly enough the list of names of people who have tried include players who later became great New Order members. Warning: close interaction with the miners is the fastest way to becoming an Agent of the New Order. If you breathe in the fumes of carebearism you might have a nasty reaction and become a witty, well spoken mass murderer.

I really love these forums and have often lamented that more players don't come here to share their experiences. One thing I haven't found any lack of is threads planning, celebrating and demanding the end of CODE. They were here in 2013 and they are still popping up like mushrooms after a summer rain shower. Some of the savier vets know that talking about us IS victory for the New Order to the point of accusing us of trolling comments with fake rage against ourselves. The truth is we don't have to do anything of the sort. There will always be people who just can't believe that we can get away with doing what we do, so effectively and with so little actual resistance from the miners. They will be here next week, next month and next year with their demands for SOMEBODY to do SOMETHING.

It won't happen then just like it hasn't happened before now.

We will win. The result is inevitable. Highsec WILL be saved.

Highsec is worth fighting for.

By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.  www.minerbumping.com

Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#65 - 2016-09-01 19:16:36 UTC
There are over 1000 systems in hi sec. CODE has never patrolled them all.

If you don't want to be bothered by CODE, move!
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2016-09-01 19:50:08 UTC
Chopper Rollins wrote:
I'm that guy that floats into every one of these threads and says-

Get out of hisec.

Simple, you can shoot anyone who looks at you funny, the rocks are better. If hisec griefers kept picking on rookies too much they'd be dealt with by some sort of game change like Fizzle sov.
Please stop taking them at all seriously, if you fight them you're diving into the muddy little ditch they live in. Leave em to it and move to null. Like, in the next few weeks.




Nullsec best sec.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#67 - 2016-09-01 20:29:47 UTC
Elenahina wrote:
Nullsec best sec.


Sov null is nearly as safe as HS anymore. LS/WH is best sec
The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#68 - 2016-09-01 20:38:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Gallente Citizen 10441710
Caco De'mon wrote:
The Butthole Licker wrote:
There are plenty of means to prevent getting ganked. But just because you where "dumb" enough to get ganked, does not mean the mechanics should not be in place to allow the dummy to retaliate.


Retaliation needs a buff



Please go on then...HOW do you suggest to retaliate? What mechanic needs a buff?


Because in the past I was a ganker, and feel it is important aspect of EVE, I would undo a lot of the nerfs to ganking. That would be the first change, followed by the ones below:

-5s cant dock in npc stations in high sec, but can dock in citadels in high sec at owner discretion

-Tags can only be used to pay sec status up to -5, to increase sec status further you must kill rats

-No criminal flag for destroying unoccupied ships floating in space

This is where you cry about how this is a nerft to ganking, however these changes do not affect ganking in its current state at all.
Paranoid Loyd
#69 - 2016-09-01 20:43:25 UTC
It is a considerable nerf to ganking although nothing another account can't circumvent.

Ignoring that, how does this buff retaliation?

"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!

The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#70 - 2016-09-01 21:07:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Gallente Citizen 10441710
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
It is a considerable nerf to ganking although nothing another account can't circumvent.

Ignoring that, how does this buff retaliation?



Because gankers would have to rat their sec status up, likely in something other than a throw away gank ship, that ship is at risk for retaliation

OR

If they choose not to rat then they have to set up a citadel, the community can retaliate agaisnt citadels that harbor criminals.

I mean CODE is so leet, they should have no problems defending citadels that they stage out of, and its business as usual for CODE


Ganking stays the same
The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#71 - 2016-09-01 21:08:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Gallente Citizen 10441710
...****
Paranoid Loyd
#72 - 2016-09-01 21:28:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Because gankers would have to rat their sec status up, likely in something other than a throw away gank ship, that ship is at risk for retaliation


May I point out CODE is mostly negative ten and don't care about their sec status?

Ignoring that, it's as simple as having two accounts, one ratting and one ganking. As much as you'd like to believe gankers never leave highsec, if I needed to rat I wouldn't do it in highsec and assuming you do have the balls to follow me, I can cloak go afk and rat when you're not around. Considering I already have to use two or three accounts, it's not like I can't just have both have a scout and a ganker on the two different accounts and switch them as the sec status dictates.

The Butthole Licker wrote:

OR

If they choose not to rat then they have to set up a citadel, the community can retaliate agaisnt citadels that harbor criminals.

I mean CODE is so leet, they should have no problems defending citadels that they stage out of, and its business as usual for CODE


Ganking stays the same

You seem to think there is a necessity to dock, there isn't. It's a luxury that can easily be done without if necessary.

So I ask again, how does this buff retaliation?

The Butthole Licker wrote:
Ganking stays the same
You are quite delusional if you think this is a valid statement as your argument presents multiple changes to it.

"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!

Chapo Muerte
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#73 - 2016-09-01 21:40:36 UTC
antiganking literally has 200+ members at any one time in their channel and roughly 5-10 players in uedama when there is a fleet up.

so lets say 5% of antiganking will come and try to "anti" gank. Where as Code alliance as a whole will have 75% off alliance members and others in fleet at anyone time.

If antiganking wont/cant/don't want to step up and do something other then complain on the forums nothing will ever change.

just sayin

The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#74 - 2016-09-01 21:40:51 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Because gankers would have to rat their sec status up, likely in something other than a throw away gank ship, that ship is at risk for retaliation


May I point out CODE is mostly negative ten and don't care about their sec status?

Ignoring that, it's as simple as having two accounts, one ratting and one ganking. As much as you'd like to believe gankers never leave highsec, if I needed to rat I wouldn't do it in highsec and assuming you do have the balls to follow me, I can cloak go afk and rat when you're not around. Considering I already have to use two or three accounts, it's not like I can't just have both have a scout and a ganker on the two different accounts and switch them as the sec status dictates.

The Butthole Licker wrote:

OR

If they choose not to rat then they have to set up a citadel, the community can retaliate agaisnt citadels that harbor criminals.

I mean CODE is so leet, they should have no problems defending citadels that they stage out of, and its business as usual for CODE


Ganking stays the same

You seem to think there is a necessity to dock, there isn't. It's a luxury that can easily be done without if necessary.

So I ask again, how does this buff retaliation?

The Butthole Licker wrote:
Ganking stays the same
You are quite delusional if you think this is a valid statement as your argument presents multiple changes to it.



Point being is it does not matter if you have scouts or a cloak, what matters is you are undocked in something other than a throw away gank ship, it is as simple as that.

I realize it is not necessary to dock to suicide gank, what is your point?
The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#75 - 2016-09-01 21:42:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Gallente Citizen 10441710
Chapo Muerte wrote:
antiganking literally has 200+ members at any one time in their channel and roughly 5-10 players in uedama when there is a fleet up.

so lets say 5% of antiganking will come and try to "anti" gank. Where as Code alliance as a whole will have 75% off alliance members and others in fleet at anyone time.

If antiganking wont/cant/don't want to step up and do something other then complain on the forums nothing will ever change.

just sayin




Yall bring up preventive measures so often, but there is another aspect to this that needs a buff. Post gank retaliation.

Just because the means to prevent an attack exist, does not mean the mechanics to retaliate after an attack should not exist. Unfortunately for the Eve community, and very very fortunately for CODE, currently they don't.
Paranoid Loyd
#76 - 2016-09-01 21:52:59 UTC
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Point being is it does not matter if you have scouts or a cloak, what matters is you are undocked in something other than a throw away gank ship, it is as simple as that.

I realize it is not necessary to dock to suicide gank, what is your point?


Ok, if you think having me in space cloaked is any different than being docked I have to question whether you actually play this game.

My point in general is everything you are proposing does nothing to buff retaliation.

The point I am trying to make about docking is your proposal to deny docking rights is nullified by the fact it is not necessary to dock to be able to gank.

"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!

The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#77 - 2016-09-01 21:55:39 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Point being is it does not matter if you have scouts or a cloak, what matters is you are undocked in something other than a throw away gank ship, it is as simple as that.

I realize it is not necessary to dock to suicide gank, what is your point?


Ok, if you think having me in space cloaked is any different than being docked I have to question whether you actually play this game.

My point in general is everything you are proposing does nothing to buff retaliation.

The point I am trying to make about docking is your proposal to deny docking rights is nullified by the fact it is not necessary to dock to be able to gank.



Like i said earlier, unoccupied ships floating in space should be vulnerable to attack without a criminal flag.

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#78 - 2016-09-01 22:00:19 UTC
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Like i said earlier, unoccupied ships floating in space should be vulnerable to attack without a criminal flag.


Normally I find the C&P forum goers annoying as it's typically just a circle jerk of HS gankers/wardeccers praising themselves, but I have to side with them on this.

How would that change anything? I've never ganked and never will, but it's a valid playstyle and it's easier to avoid now than ever before. Do you even play this game, or are you trolling? I'm assuming trolling...
Paranoid Loyd
#79 - 2016-09-01 22:03:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Point being is it does not matter if you have scouts or a cloak, what matters is you are undocked in something other than a throw away gank ship, it is as simple as that.

I realize it is not necessary to dock to suicide gank, what is your point?


Ok, if you think having me in space cloaked is any different than being docked I have to question whether you actually play this game.

My point in general is everything you are proposing does nothing to buff retaliation.

The point I am trying to make about docking is your proposal to deny docking rights is nullified by the fact it is not necessary to dock to be able to gank.



Like i said earlier, unoccupied ships floating in space should be vulnerable to attack without a criminal flag.


Yep you did say that, I didn't address it because it's the silliest of your proposed changes. If you think you can probe out my 10 safe spots, guess which one I chose and then get there by the time my alt brings me a ship you are delusional.

"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!

The Butthole Licker
Doomheim
#80 - 2016-09-01 22:06:15 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
The Butthole Licker wrote:
Point being is it does not matter if you have scouts or a cloak, what matters is you are undocked in something other than a throw away gank ship, it is as simple as that.

I realize it is not necessary to dock to suicide gank, what is your point?


Ok, if you think having me in space cloaked is any different than being docked I have to question whether you actually play this game.

My point in general is everything you are proposing does nothing to buff retaliation.

The point I am trying to make about docking is your proposal to deny docking rights is nullified by the fact it is not necessary to dock to be able to gank.



Like i said earlier, unoccupied ships floating in space should be vulnerable to attack without a criminal flag.


Yep you did say that, if you think you can probe out my 10 safe spots, guess which one I chose and then get there by the time my alt brings me a ship you are delusional.



If I'm delusional than why are you so against the change? If it makes no difference than why not?