These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Eve Miners Guide to the New Order of Highsec (A.K.A. James 315 and his gang), Part 1
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2013-09-10 05:24:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
baltec1 wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
I really doubt it, considering spawning or moving CONCORD away from a gank is allowed. Have you heard that from an official source?


Yes. CCP deemed it an exploit when we did the second interdiction as Concord is not meant to be on grid protecting people. We got a good number of alt accounts in ibis banned for doing this.


I found a CCP post from 5 years ago saying summoning concord to grid for protection was perfectly fine, but that doing so with throwaway alts was bannable, as recycling pilots to regain sec status is generally disallowed. Obviously that's a super old post, but I couldn't find anything more recent, and that policy provides an alternate explanation for those banned ibis pilots. Does anyone have a more recent link where a dev outlines the policy clearly?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#22 - 2013-09-10 05:24:14 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
I'll believe you, then. It's nonsense, though. CONCORD isn't ~supposed~ to do anything except either spawn or warp around. If it's supposed to not sit on grid, CCP should change the mechanic instead of halfarseing a double-standard rule.


It doesn't, they use the ibis alts to keep on re-spawning concord when they leave.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2013-09-10 05:27:05 UTC
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
I really doubt it, considering spawning or moving CONCORD away from a gank is allowed. Have you heard that from an official source?


Yes. CCP deemed it an exploit when we did the second interdiction as Concord is not meant to be on grid protecting people. We got a good number of alt accounts in ibis banned for doing this.


I found a CCP post from 5 years ago saying summoning concord to grid was perfectly fine, but that doing so with throwaway alts was bannable, as recycling pilots to regain sec status is generally disallowed. Obviously that's a super old post, but I couldn't find anything more recent, and that policy provides an alternate explanation for those banned ibis pilots. Does anyone have a more recent link where a dev outlines the policy clearly?


No links but CCP said last year that they want people to organize their own protection and not use concord as bodyguards.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#24 - 2013-09-10 05:28:37 UTC
They allow fiction in GD these days?

Even with a killmail it still isn't a GD thread.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2013-09-10 05:33:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Benny Ohu
baltec1 wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
I'll believe you, then. It's nonsense, though. CONCORD isn't ~supposed~ to do anything except either spawn or warp around. If it's supposed to not sit on grid, CCP should change the mechanic instead of halfarseing a double-standard rule.


It doesn't, they use the ibis alts to keep on re-spawning concord when they leave.

I don't understand. But CONCORD is stupid. And a 15-minute gank timer is stupid. And being able to move CONCORD around at all is stupid.

How come the boomeranging exploit got nerfed in days but this protection exploit is left as is until someone petitions it.

E: also the new rule isn't exactly broadcasted or easy to find out about is it

i'm getting emotional on the internet so imma leave and eat some chips
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#26 - 2013-09-10 05:42:36 UTC
1) Why everything about James 315, said by him or not, has to involve biblic Blink walls of text?

2) In case this gank happened, James 315 has actually succeeded. One of his objectives is to wake up some miners from their slumber and show them more of the full game. This is what happened. 1 in a 1000 but happened.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#27 - 2013-09-10 05:43:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
**offtopic post
Benny Ohu wrote:

i'm getting emotional on the internet so imma leave and eat some chips

Extremely thin slices of fried potato, or the godly kind of thickly sliced fried potato Question

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#28 - 2013-09-10 05:54:52 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
I'll believe you, then. It's nonsense, though. CONCORD isn't ~supposed~ to do anything except either spawn or warp around. If it's supposed to not sit on grid, CCP should change the mechanic instead of halfarseing a double-standard rule.


It doesn't, they use the ibis alts to keep on re-spawning concord when they leave.

I don't understand. But CONCORD is stupid. And a 15-minute gank timer is stupid. And being able to move CONCORD around at all is stupid.

How come the boomeranging exploit got nerfed in days but this protection exploit is left as is until someone petitions it.

E: also the new rule isn't exactly broadcasted or easy to find out about is it

i'm getting emotional on the internet so imma leave and eat some chips


boomerang went on for years.

CCP cant do much in this case as concord is meant to stay on grid for a while. The issues comes when people start throwing ibis into the grinder to keep the concord spawn in place to act as bodyguards.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#29 - 2013-09-10 06:11:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kharmha wrote:

even to the point of using throwaway toons to purposely draw concord ships to the belts simply for the

protection from gankers they gave.


There are two bannable offences being used here.


According to you, throwaway alts are kosher provided you start new accounts instead of biomassing on a single one.

And I just call bullshit on the second one; if you can suicide to pull concord off grid, miners can suicide to pull concord on grid. CCP has never publicly said anything else and it's a downright dumb notion.

Op is also obviously fake, but w/e
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#30 - 2013-09-10 06:13:54 UTC
S Byerley wrote:


And I just call bullshit on the second one; if you can suicide to pull concord off grid, miners can suicide to pull concord on grid. CCP has never publicly said anything else and it's a downright dumb notion.





Pulling concord about is fine.

Using concord as invincible bodyguards is an exploit.
Alicia Aishai
Perkone
Caldari State
#31 - 2013-09-10 06:18:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Alicia Aishai
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
1) Why everything about James 315, said by him or not, has to involve biblic Blink walls of text?

2) In case this gank happened, James 315 has actually succeeded. One of his objectives is to wake up some miners from their slumber and show them more of the full game. This is what happened. 1 in a 1000 but happened.


If he succeeded, then why wasn't he boasting of his success, as he usually does so well. No he was just pissed off and logged out.
James315 is just a pathological egomaniac, nothing more. He would feel powerful with his (supposedly) risk free gank strategy, he wants attention on him like a kid. As the op pointed out, he would never accept any duels, even after taunting people into asking a duel. No balls at all. Avoiding real PvP by ganking miners who cannot fight back - that's about all what he can do.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#32 - 2013-09-10 06:23:05 UTC  |  Edited by: S Byerley
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:


And I just call bullshit on the second one; if you can suicide to pull concord off grid, miners can suicide to pull concord on grid. CCP has never publicly said anything else and it's a downright dumb notion.





Pulling concord about is fine.


The notion that you can do it a little but not a lot is, again, downright dumb - so dumb that I refuse to dignify it with witty put-downs.

baltec1 wrote:
Using concord as invincible bodyguards is an exploit.


In response to the question of whether you can use Concord as "your personal mining op suicide ganking defense fleet"

CCP Atropos wrote:
How does my reply differ from that you quoted?

The reasoning is that you're deliberately using free ships (noob frigates) and alts to bypass the risk and penalties incurred by angering CONCORD. The incurred penalties are ignored since there's no financial loss, and no meaningful security loss, since you would delete the character afterwards.

Of course, if you're willing to live with these penalties, and don't delete the offending character, then there's no problem, since it is working as intended (you lose your ship, become criminally flagged, and incur a security hit). Although no one will really like you since you're spawning CONCORD to cover your own money making schemes Cool

How about getting some players to help you mine in safety?


Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
1) Why everything about James 315, said by him or not, has to involve biblic Blink walls of text?


Mostly because everything about James 315 is written by James 315
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#33 - 2013-09-10 06:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Shalua Rui
Hu... but how is there any difference in pulling CONCORD away from miners to safely gank and miners using CONCORD as bodyguards? ...just asking, never done either.

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#34 - 2013-09-10 06:52:18 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Spawning concord for protection has been deemed an exploit.

Lovely.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2013-09-10 06:54:51 UTC
Alicia Aishai wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
1) Why everything about James 315, said by him or not, has to involve biblic Blink walls of text?

2) In case this gank happened, James 315 has actually succeeded. One of his objectives is to wake up some miners from their slumber and show them more of the full game. This is what happened. 1 in a 1000 but happened.


If he succeeded, then why wasn't he boasting of his success, as he usually does so well. No he was just pissed off and logged out.
James315 is just a pathological egomaniac, nothing more. He would feel powerful with his (supposedly) risk free gank strategy, he wants attention on him like a kid. As the op pointed out, he would never accept any duels, even after taunting people into asking a duel. No balls at all. Avoiding real PvP by ganking miners who cannot fight back - that's about all what he can do.

James 315 is the most skilled, elite and honourable man in highsec space. As it would be dishonourable for such a skilled pvper to 1v1 and stomp someone who isn't as elite as he, only the most determined or powerful players may challenge him for an honourable duel.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2013-09-10 07:00:37 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
boomerang went on for years.

CCP cant do much in this case as concord is meant to stay on grid for a while. The issues comes when people start throwing ibis into the grinder to keep the concord spawn in place to act as bodyguards.

From what I saw, boomerang was declared an exploit and nerfed with the instant-web and 15-minute timer within days of CCP finding out about it?

I'm just a bit miffed that one exploit is ruled against, declared and mechanics implemented immediately to combat it, but another is ruled against, kept quiet and nothing happens

Also, I'm stil not entirely clear on this. Is pulling CONCORD onto grid for protection once an exploit?
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#37 - 2013-09-10 07:05:12 UTC
Alicia Aishai wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
1) Why everything about James 315, said by him or not, has to involve biblic Blink walls of text?

2) In case this gank happened, James 315 has actually succeeded. One of his objectives is to wake up some miners from their slumber and show them more of the full game. This is what happened. 1 in a 1000 but happened.


If he succeeded, then why wasn't he boasting of his success, as he usually does so well. No he was just pissed off and logged out.
James315 is just a pathological egomaniac, nothing more. He would feel powerful with his (supposedly) risk free gank strategy, he wants attention on him like a kid. As the op pointed out, he would never accept any duels, even after taunting people into asking a duel. No balls at all. Avoiding real PvP by ganking miners who cannot fight back - that's about all what he can do.


There's no doubt he succeeded.

Basing on his showoffs and talks, the guy managed to gather more than 100 billions from other players.

That's quite a good reward ratio for risking a stabber, isn't it? Blink

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#38 - 2013-09-10 07:06:42 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
boomerang went on for years.

CCP cant do much in this case as concord is meant to stay on grid for a while. The issues comes when people start throwing ibis into the grinder to keep the concord spawn in place to act as bodyguards.

From what I saw, boomerang was declared an exploit and nerfed with the instant-web and 15-minute timer within days of CCP finding out about it?

I'm just a bit miffed that one exploit is ruled against, declared and mechanics implemented immediately to combat it, but another is ruled against, kept quiet and nothing happens

Also, I'm stil not entirely clear on this. Is pulling CONCORD onto grid for protection once an exploit?

Maybe they need to make dragging concord away the exploit

nerf ganking more

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#39 - 2013-09-10 07:12:50 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Also, I'm stil not entirely clear on this. Is pulling CONCORD onto grid for protection once an exploit?


What motivation could a suicide ganker possibly have to convince you that a suicide ganking defense is an exploit?
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#40 - 2013-09-10 07:16:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
S Byerley wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Also, I'm stil not entirely clear on this. Is pulling CONCORD onto grid for protection once an exploit?


What motivation could a suicide ganker possibly have to convince you that a suicide ganking defense is an exploit?

What motivation could a suicide ganker possibly have to tell their victims how to protect themselves? Yet they do, on a regular basis, and have done so for some time.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack