EVE New Citizens Q&A

Hello,

I was recently killed by Concord. Even though I wasn't doing anything aggressive.

I was working in a fleet operation, in high sec space, and activated the Cetus Scoped Burst Jammer
within proximity of other fleet members - so that I could disrupt targeting locks on friendly ships. I have used this successfully many times before, and have always been careful to ensure that no other players were in the vicinity.

But when I did it during a fleet operation - I got a message saying that my security status had been lowered. Shortly afterward my ship gets blown up by Concord. Which is totally unfair. Why does using the ECM jammer register as an aggressive act when the only ships in proximity were either NPC rats, or fleet ships (which I am trying to protect).

The Burst jammer is a fleet wide ECM tool. It simply does not make sense that it's use should register as aggressive when used to jam attacks on fleet members - who being protected by it.

CCP please fix your game.

Yes there is. Criminal activities include jamming other players. I was not jamming other players. I had fleet members in my AoE, and the use of the jammer was intended to PROTECT them. Not HARM them.


Use of burst jammer should not register as aggressive when done in a fleet. I still think it needs fixing... Either that or the wording should be made clearer. If indeed the applying of a jamming effect to any other player is an illegal action. Then this should be included in the list of things which result in Concord retaliation.

Being in a fleet does not change aggression mechanics, if any of those people in your fleet were not in your corp (or your corp doesn't have friendly fire enabled) then Concord will come and kill you for aggresing them illegally.

Edit - when you get invited to a fleet I believe you get a popup which states this.

Con...

...COR....

...DOOOOOOOOO...

...KKEEEEEEEENNNN!!!!!...

*Ship explodes*

The people in your fleet were players. You were jamming other players. You can't expect the AI for the module to be able to determine your intent; computers are nowhere near advanced enough for that. It's the same situation as a freighter alt webifying the freighter to make it go faster. Without precautions, activating that webifier will result in Concord.

You are asking CCP to change the burst module to magically only affect non-fleet-members. If they do that, they might as well do the same for smartbombs, regular bombs, warp bubbles, AoE doomsdays, and any other AoE effect. It's not the way the game currently works, but feel free to suggest it in the Ideas forum.

Well firstly, I have used Smart Bombs in high sec and they are not illegal. They do however require disabling the safety system, and you need to be careful that there are no non-aggressive ships in the blast radius.... And hence the requirement to disable safety system to use the Burst Jammer is not sufficient. Because all AoE devices have this requirement. Just because something something could conceivably become illegal does not make it clear in what circumstances it will be illegal.... According to the definition of what is illegal, reading from wiki helps and guides, jamming constitutes an illegal act - and this is not the same (and therefore does not include) jamming applied UPON a player to prevent 3rd parties from shooting them.


Also, I'm not suggesting any change to the actual game mechanics. I still think that the jammer should apply to all ships within AoE indiscriminately. What I am saying is that instead of registering as an aggressive act against the ships within AoE. It should instead be registering as an aggressive act against ships engaging those ships within AoE.

For example

Ship A is flying next to ship B. Ship C is in combat with Ship B. Now when Ship A activates a Burst jammer with Ship B within their AoE, what should be happening is that this register as a suspect act of ship A against ship C. Not ship A against ship B. Understand?

If the burst jammer should be punished by Concord only along lines similar to remote repair units. It is a remote boosting device - and should be treated as such.

Incorrect. It is not disrupting the targeting of all ships within range. It is disrupting target locks on ships within range.

Also, I'm not trolling. Am highlighting a real problem which needs to be addressed and fixed.

You're not trolling.

You're requesting a change to how the module works, in the wrong forum, and we disagree with it.

And we're trying to point out that activating any EWAR modules count as an act of aggression. they all generate an aggression timer. Damps, Tracking/Guidance Disruptors, ECM and ECM Burst modules are all "offensive" modules.

Your intent here really doesn't factor into it. You let rip with an AoE device and hit people you have no standing to hit with it, hence CONCORDUKKEN! Exactly the same as a smartbomb.

If you want to do this, have everyone in the fleet accept a Duel with you BEFORE you let it off, or have everyone in the same corp with Friendly Fire set to Legal.

Think about it, just for a second. Without this mechanic, there's nothing to stop me sitting my Falcon in a High Sec Ice Belt and jamming out every mining vessel that turns up. They can't target lock (or keep a lock for a full cycle), they can't mine. That's an "aggressive act".

This is slightly offtopic.
I don't know if it's true for the mining frigates but in my experience when using a barge or exhumer you can drop the lock during a cycle and the cycle will still complete; I do it all the time in order to have a full "rack" of locked roids when the one currently being mined won't have enough left for another cycle on completion.

At the OP AOE modules have a splash effect, if that splash catches another player that doesn't meet a number of criteria then the person who activated it will incur the wrath of Concord; the members of your fleet that got hit by the splash obviously didn't meet those criteria.