These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Technically avoiding concord?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#21 - 2016-12-14 16:30:51 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
Is this not technically a form of evading concord? The killing ship was destroyed, but the same person picked up the loot without consequence.



First of all, pretty much everyone loathes the whiny little rules-lawyer at the table, so you'd be well advised to stow that.

Secondly, if you're going to rules-lawyer, understand the rules first.

Concord doesn't care about your loot. The guy that shot you was concorded, ergo, Concord was not avoided.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#22 - 2016-12-14 16:35:03 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
mkint wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Fek Mercer wrote:

Spin it how you like, someone can use an alt to destroy high value targets and then, in essence, avoid concord using their main. What have they lost? It's a net gain. It is a simple matter to create another sec status dumpster to continue destroying high value targets.

They are, for all intents and purposes, immune to concord...


You seem to have a point to me, unless someone can explain how you don't. It's a garbage alt. He uses it as a sec-status dumpster. Once sec drops too much, he trashes the character, makes a new one, rinse, repeat. Doesn't seem like he's out anything.

Didn't I read somewhere at some point that this technically isn't allowed? Though whether or not it's enforced in any way, is a different matter.



It's technically not allowed. It's also a point that's totally irrelevant here. The guy the OP is whining about has a KB history extending back to 2011. Corp history goes back to 2005.


Beast of Revelations wrote:
Fek Mercer wrote:

Spin it how you like, someone can use an alt to destroy high value targets and then, in essence, avoid concord using their main. What have they lost? It's a net gain. It is a simple matter to create another sec status dumpster to continue destroying high value targets.

They are, for all intents and purposes, immune to concord...


You seem to have a point to me, unless someone can explain how you don't. It's a garbage alt. He uses it as a sec-status dumpster. Once sec drops too much, he trashes the character, makes a new one, rinse, repeat. Doesn't seem like he's out anything.



Couldn't be bothered to do even a few seconds worth of research before just making **** up, huh?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Sinjin Mokk
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2016-12-14 16:35:09 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
The consequence to that person was losing the ship that shot you, plus losing some Sec. rating to his character, who will eventually get past -5 and become free-for-all / have trouble moving through high-sec.

Neutral alt with the industrial is neutral.

You're not safe in high-sec, people will shoot you for your loot or for the kill mail. In null, wh, and even low-sec, you know who your enemies are (everyone you see), in high-sec, you don't know until you get shot at, and by then it's too late.



Totally right,

Though I should mention that you can go to certain systems and pay the DED (bribe local officials) to improve your sec status. Or just make another alt or two and spend a few hours training them to fly a gank Thrasher. So the loss of sec status is a pretty useless threat when you can make more than enough ISK to improve it regularly if you get a few good hauls.

"Angels live, they never die, Apart from us, behind the sky. They're fading souls who've turned to ice, So ashen white in paradise."
Bjorn Tyrson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2016-12-14 16:37:55 UTC
Did concord respond? did the pilot who shot you loose his ship? if so then there was no concord avoidance. yes he had an alt standing by to scoop the loot, but it could have been some random pilot as well. hell i've made some pretty decent isk from jacking the remains of a ganking before the pirate could. everything is working as intended.
Alasdan Helminthauge
AirHogs
Hogs Collective
#25 - 2016-12-14 16:43:13 UTC
I'd say that a thrasher and an industrial ship for the possible 80 mil drop at Jita gate isn't very good business. the reward for the risk isn't very lucrative.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#26 - 2016-12-14 16:55:13 UTC
CONCORD does not provide safety.

CONCORD provides consequences.

HiSec is not, nor should it be, completely safe.

Fly appropriately.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Lfod Shi
Lfod's Ratting and Salvage
#27 - 2016-12-14 17:00:17 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
I came back from my first successful exploration run in a while, only to be oneshotted by a thrasher waiting by the common warp-in point outside jita. .


I'm sorry for your loss. Been there. Never take the common route if you can avoid it. It's not paranoia if they're actually out to get you, and they are.

♪ They'll always be bloodclaws to me ♫
Nalia White
Tencus
#28 - 2016-12-14 17:07:19 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
what's the purpose of concord though? To stop an area of the game from becoming a free for all, and thus allowing different playstyles. Why then, create a rule that make concord avoidance a bannable offence? Clearly, we want to keep some measure of the peace.

Spin it how you like, someone can use an alt to destroy high value targets and then, in essence, avoid concord using their main. What have they lost? It's a net gain. It is a simple matter to create another sec status dumpster to continue destroying high value targets.


They are, for all intents and purposes, immune to concord and are in the free for all zone. There are many ways to make is in eve, but this one, for all it's ingenuity, is against the rules.


didn't you understand what was written here or would you like some cheese with your wine???

seriously. you are still talking about evading CONCORD when the thrasher shooting you clearly was shot down by CONCORD. the ship looting your wreck gets a suspect timer like you would if you would loot a wreck in highsec that doesn't belong to you...

accept the loss. it's no shame to lose a ship, it's a shame to lose a ship in the same fashion twice or comming to the forums whining...

Syndicate - K5-JRD

Home to few, graveyard for many

My biggest achievement
Kolinthia Lincoln
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2016-12-14 17:24:39 UTC
Lol corporations literally pay Concord to look the other way in war decs. That's equivalent to a gang paying two cops on the side walk to look the other way while they continue down the road and beat a hotdog cart vendor to death. There's really no point to Concord because high sec isn't safe.
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#30 - 2016-12-14 17:27:55 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
what's the purpose of concord though? To stop an area of the game from becoming a free for all, and thus allowing different playstyles. Why then, create a rule that make concord avoidance a bannable offence? Clearly, we want to keep some measure of the peace.

Spin it how you like, someone can use an alt to destroy high value targets and then, in essence, avoid concord using their main. What have they lost? It's a net gain. It is a simple matter to create another sec status dumpster to continue destroying high value targets.


They are, for all intents and purposes, immune to concord and are in the free for all zone. There are many ways to make is in eve, but this one, for all it's ingenuity, is against the rules.


Lmao, OP thinks being a space pirate in this space piracy game is against the rules.
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#31 - 2016-12-14 17:43:07 UTC
One minor point.... The ship looting your wreck... You assume it is the ganked. Here's a tip, with a fast ship you can loot what others gank. It's a fun challenge and you can collect tears from the very people who are trying to collect tears from others. Plus make a decent profit.
Memphis Baas
#32 - 2016-12-14 18:14:14 UTC
Bottom line, the entire scenario was played exactly according to the rules laid down by CCP. So, what are you talking to us for? Take it up with CCP, write a petition, ask them to change the game. Or stop playing if you don't like how the game is.

Whether we like or dislike suicide ganking is completely and totally irrelevant.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2016-12-14 18:40:13 UTC
Kolinthia Lincoln wrote:
Lol corporations literally pay Concord to look the other way in war decs. That's equivalent to a gang paying two cops on the side walk to look the other way while they continue down the road and beat a hotdog cart vendor to death. There's really no point to Concord because high sec isn't safe.

But there really is. If there was no point to the existence of CONCORD, then Hisec would be a lot like Losec. Would you say that Hisec is like Losec?

Personally, as a player who is used to living in all areas of space, I feel quite safe in Hi. However, I do not have the illusion that I am untouchable there. I am just much harder to get to than I would be in Lo or Null, and that is thanks to the existence of CONCORD.

The simple fact that you have to pay to legally shoot a specific group, and that people can leave this group and just continue doing their thing creates a completely different environment. CONCORD does not exist to prevent combat, but to regulate it and as I see it, it works for that purpose.
Wallstreet J0urnal
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#34 - 2016-12-14 19:43:22 UTC
Grief is acceptable in EVE.

Without his alt, do you think he would still do it? Probably not.

Sadly some guys get hard ons by blowing up helpless players. To them this is acceptable and challenging pvp.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#35 - 2016-12-14 19:55:05 UTC
Wallstreet J0urnal wrote:
Grief is acceptable in EVE.

Without his alt, do you think he would still do it? Probably not.

Sadly some guys get hard ons by blowing up helpless players. To them this is acceptable and challenging pvp.


He wasn't helpless, and attempting to dehumanize people for the way they play a game makes you sound like an infant.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Wallstreet J0urnal
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#36 - 2016-12-14 19:58:53 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Wallstreet J0urnal wrote:
Grief is acceptable in EVE.

Without his alt, do you think he would still do it? Probably not.

Sadly some guys get hard ons by blowing up helpless players. To them this is acceptable and challenging pvp.


He wasn't helpless, and attempting to dehumanize people for the way they play a game makes you sound like an infant.


Dehumanizing?

Not sure what's worse, calling an idividual names on a forum or having a different perspective of the scenario posted. Cute though, I like the infant term lol
Revis Owen
Krigmakt Elite
Safety.
#37 - 2016-12-14 20:05:40 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
In null, wh, and even low-sec, you know who your enemies are (everyone you see), in high-sec, you don't know until you get shot at, and by then it's too late.


Why should the assumption about everyone you see in null, wh, and low-sec not be an assumption used in high-sec? High-sec is actually the most dangerous space in New Eden, as anyone with experience knows.

Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.
Iain Cariaba
#38 - 2016-12-14 21:22:24 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
only to be oneshotted by a thrasher waiting by the common warp-in point outside jita.

Congrats, OP. You've just learned why autopilot is not your friend.
killer blade2
Dying Fetus Inc.
#39 - 2016-12-14 21:35:01 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Fek Mercer wrote:
only to be oneshotted by a thrasher waiting by the common warp-in point outside jita.

Congrats, OP. You've just learned why autopilot is not your friend.


Yep this right here auto pilot will get you every time.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2016-12-14 21:53:11 UTC
Wallstreet J0urnal wrote:
Grief is acceptable in EVE.

Without his alt, do you think he would still do it? Probably not.

Sadly some guys get hard ons by blowing up helpless players. To them this is acceptable and challenging pvp.

Who said it was an alt? Could have been a friend or a random 3rd party. Would it change anything about the situation if it was his alt?