These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Advice on avoiding the Suicide gank

First post
Author
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#41 - 2014-11-03 14:09:34 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

One guy in a badly fit barge shrieking at the top of his lungs and providing tears - Clearly not a bot - Gets ganked.


Bot aspirancy is equally as much an affront against the sandbox. Moreso, I would argue, since they are the ones crying for nerfs all the time.

Quote:

A fleet of procurers controlled by bots or isboxer mining all day long providing no tears - no ganking.


Really? Because they smartbombed a fleet of those just the other day. Got a whole bunch of them, although the freighter lived.

But then I wouldn't expect you would have known that, since you argue on rhetoric and not facts.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#42 - 2014-11-03 14:14:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Besides, since the efforts CODE are actually in favour of botters and against individual players
Citation needed.
It's fairly simple, look at their actions.

One guy in a badly fit barge shrieking at the top of his lungs and providing tears - Clearly not a bot - Gets ganked.

A fleet of procurers controlled by bots or isboxer mining all day long providing no tears - no ganking.

The end result is that bots and mass multiboxers don't have to worry about a fair chunk their competition. If they were really against botters, they'd do all they can to disrupt bot activity and support the individuals mining. They don't, so either their goals are not as stated, or they are the most incompetent group in the game, managing to do the exact opposite of their goals.
\

I always took what CODE does as punishing people who think their are entitled to SAFE AFK gameplay in EVE Online.

The ISBOXER guy isn't afk (and it doesn't matter if you don't like isboxer) so he isn't doing anything 'wrong' (from a CODE perspective). And you have no idea how many bots CODE kills because some miners are actually well adjusted adult gamers who don't sperg in local when they get ganked so no one but CCP could tell if they were a botter or not.

We get it, you don't like CODE, but as usual your dislike of something clouds your judgment, which is a shame because otherwise you'd be one of the smarter posters.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#43 - 2014-11-03 14:34:26 UTC
Skydell wrote:
- Missions: Officer and blue fittings are not suitable for missions. They may be appropriate in fleet based stuff like Incursions but even there they aren't needed. A Blue fit Golem is gank bait and garbage you won't replace when you lose it, you will figure out why when you lose it.

- Hauling: Pay attention to what you are hauling, know that a blockade runner can't be scanned, know that people flapping about how they blow up all Blockade runners because stuff, are full of it. If you need to haul in a Freighter, have a web alt and most important, don't Auto pilot.

- Mining: Plag and Veld are the ore that make money right now. Mining them in .8 or .5 will be just as boring and will make the same amount of ISK. One has a 20 second Concord response, one has a 7 second Concord response. You have amplified the dps output of a gank squad by 300% just by choosing to mine in what is essentially, garbage space. Tank is not an option, even in .8 sec. If the tank forces them to find 40 Destroyers or 10 Tier 3 BC's to destroy you they will give up. Gankers are lazy that way. If they wanted to work for their ISK they would be mining beside you or running a mission.

Last but not least, if you find yourself being pestered by people all too often, leave the game drop your sub and play something else. EVE the game you would like it to be won't be EVE the game we get stuck with because someone else is in a mood. That needs to be relayed in the most influential way possible when required and money talks.


Blue fittings are fine for missions. Chances of getting ganked are minuscule.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#44 - 2014-11-03 14:44:18 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

We get it, you don't like CODE, but as usual your dislike of something clouds your judgment, which is a shame because otherwise you'd be one of the smarter posters.

You disagree with our stated views, therefore your judgement is clouded, therefore you are wrong. Roll
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#45 - 2014-11-03 14:44:55 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Bot aspirancy is equally as much an affront against the sandbox. Moreso, I would argue, since they are the ones crying for nerfs all the time.
But they aren't bot aspirant. Arguably, CODE being around is encouragement to multibox a procurer fleet semi-AFK over playing "properly".

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Really? Because they smartbombed a fleet of those just the other day. Got a whole bunch of them, although the freighter lived.

But then I wouldn't expect you would have known that, since you argue on rhetoric and not facts.
So because they've done it at least once, that somehow invalidates the fact that the vast majority of their kills are not against bots?

Jenn aSide wrote:
The ISBOXER guy isn't afk (and it doesn't matter if you don't like isboxer) so he isn't doing anything 'wrong' (from a CODE perspective).
Bull. The ISBoxer miner is more AFK than any "normal" miner. You target the rocks, you hit F1, then you play something else. Periodically you drag cargo from your ship to the hauler (in about 3 mouse motions) and reset your lasers. The difference is you only do this on one machine and it replicates to all of the others, meaning that your effort per character is significantly reduced.

Seriously, you should try it. I have. I can clear out whole systems of all belts while playing other games by interacting with EVE only during cutscenes and load times.

Jenn aSide wrote:
We get it, you don't like CODE, but as usual your dislike of something clouds your judgment, which is a shame because otherwise you'd be one of the smarter posters.
It's got absolutely nothing to do with my like or dislike of anyone. They run around the forums screeching about how they are saving the game from bot aspirants while their actions do exactly the opposite, and I point it out because it's incredibly amusing to watch all the code loving basement dwellers swarming to their defense. I love how you are now even defending ISBoxer mining of all things to try to defend CODE.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#46 - 2014-11-03 14:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Black Pedro wrote:
It is not complete nonsense - your advice - to be "tanked enough" is in the Code after all. There is a lot of good stuff in there to help you avoid being suicide ganked. Despite what you claim permits aren't revoked lightly but this discussion has be hashed out to death - I suggest you check out this thread for one such discussion.
But permits themselves are irrelevant, whether you give out good advice or not. In the thread you've linked is this:
Quote:
I've found the best way to verify a permit is to attempt to gank. Valid permit holders, who are following The Code, cannot be ganked.

Should the gank succeed, then the permit was obviously invalid, seeing as how valid permit holders following The Code cannot be ganked.
So holding a permit is completely irrelevant.

La Nariz wrote:
More of your dinsdale crap.
Dinsdale rarely posts anything close to facts. Everything I've stated there can be verified with ease.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2014-11-03 14:46:24 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

We get it, you don't like CODE, but as usual your dislike of something clouds your judgment, which is a shame because otherwise you'd be one of the smarter posters.

You disagree with our stated views, therefore your judgement is clouded, therefore you are wrong. Roll


Sounds like you and the highsec crowds response to the basic statistics I did showing that highsec reward was higher than nullsec reward.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#48 - 2014-11-03 14:51:22 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

It's got absolutely nothing to do with my like or dislike of anyone. [/quote]

erm.....

Quote:

They run around the forums screeching about how they are saving the game from bot aspirants while their actions do exactly the opposite, and I point it out because it's incredibly amusing to watch all the code loving basement dwellers swarming to their defense. I love how you are now even defending ISBoxer mining of all things to try to defend CODE.


Holy Contradiction batman.

You prove my point. You don't like CODE, gankers and apparently ISBOXER using players. See, I don't care one way or another about those things so I can look at them rationally, but you, well, you're worrying about what some other players are SAYING (which is juvenile).

CCP says isboxer is ok, that means it's ok because it's CCP's game. I tried isboxer once and it was tedious as hell, so more power to them if they can run umpteen million clients using it.

You can get mad at me point out your flaw Kell if that makes you feel better, but the truth is you are your own worst enemy in these kinds of discussions.


PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#49 - 2014-11-03 14:53:12 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

We get it, you don't like CODE, but as usual your dislike of something clouds your judgment, which is a shame because otherwise you'd be one of the smarter posters.

You disagree with our stated views, therefore your judgement is clouded, therefore you are wrong. Roll


Sounds like you and the highsec crowds response to the basic statistics I did showing that highsec reward was higher than nullsec reward.

Don't know about the "hisec crowd," but I despise "you're wrong, stop posting" type responses with a passion. I may disagree with a viewpoint, but I usually try to bring up supporting evidence for my position.

In the case of the null/hisec reward debate, I believe my position was: "if nullsec is so sh*t, and hisec so great, why the f*ck are 30,000 people paying the null blocs billions upon billions a month for the privilege of living in null."

A far cry from Jen's "You disagree with us, you must dislike X, therefore you're judgement is clouded and you are wrong."
Trey Kutoi
SergalJerk
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#50 - 2014-11-03 14:53:47 UTC
Simply following parts of the code without buying a permit should be enough to avoid a casual gank.

Namely, Watch Dscan, Use the map tool/dotlan to figure out where the ganking activity is going on, and attend to all your activities.

Code acts on their own conveniences. if you make it extremely inconvenient (ie not walking into them, taking a different route, or taking more trips with less cargo, flying at a different time) they are less likely to get you. They might 'lulz' gank you a few times, but by doing so, gives you a datapoint of who and where to avoid when.

It might seem unavoidable but, ultimately everything can be traced back far enough to blame yourself, its just a matter of balancing that risk and subsequent blame.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#51 - 2014-11-03 14:59:46 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:

Don't know about the "hisec crowd," but I despise "you're wrong, stop posting" type responses with a passion. I may disagree with a viewpoint, but I usually try to bring up supporting evidence for my position.


no one told him to stop posting. I'm simpyl point out his irrationality when the subject is "things or peopel he doesn't like". I'm not ccp, i can't tell someone to stop posting.

Quote:

In the case of the null/hisec reward debate, I believe my position was: "if nullsec is so sh*t, and hisec so great, why the f*ck are 30,000 people paying the null blocs billions upon billions a month for the privilege of living in null."


Because they're stupid? Again (and it's already been explained to you), the fact that so much space is rented is the answer to the question. Prior to this renting wasn't as common. That you refuse to understand an answer is not the same thing as someone not providing evidence.

Quote:

A far cry from Jen's "You disagree with us, you must dislike X, therefore you're judgement is clouded and you are wrong."


Right or wrong has nothign to do with who agrees with me, it has to do with right and wrong. One day you might just learn this.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#52 - 2014-11-03 15:01:51 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Holy Contradiction batman.

You prove my point. You don't like CODE, gankers and apparently ISBOXER using players. See, I don't care one way or another about those things so I can look at them rationally, but you, well, you're worrying about what some other players are SAYING (which is juvenile).
Uh, what contradiction? Read it again and tell me where I state that I dislike either of those things. You are projecting your assumptions on to me. That sounds remarkably like your failing, not mine. Being amused by dumb people getting riled up about pretend religions and believing that ISBoxer makes certain tasks too easy to replicate is not a dislike.

Jenn aSide wrote:
CCP says isboxer is ok, that means it's ok because it's CCP's game. I tried isboxer once and it was tedious as hell, so more power to them if they can run umpteen million clients using it.
I know... hence my ISBoxer subscription. I don't dislike ISBoxer, but that doesn't mean I don't see why it's also a problem, and it certainly doesn't mean I won't use it to greatly benefit.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#53 - 2014-11-03 15:02:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
But they aren't bot aspirant.


What, because they said so? Here's a tip. If you die to a suicide ganker, you were probably a bot aspirant. And when I say "probably", I mean 99% or higher that you weren't paying enough attention to warp out when neg tens enter local.

As for the remainder, tiny as it may be, well. I don't have to justify PvP in a PvP game. If you are mining in the first place, get used to the idea of being shot at.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#54 - 2014-11-03 15:04:06 UTC
Hilti Enaka wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Hilti Enaka wrote:

Because webby got ganked as well.


Ha, bullshit. You're just scrambling to justify your complaining now.


No really it got ganked.


Perhaps tank your webbing ship?

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#55 - 2014-11-03 15:07:43 UTC  |  Edited by: La Rynx
Miromme Echerie wrote:
Righto. So, now permits are badges of shame. I swear, some people..

Indeed it is.

Yea some people...
code people...

Because:
Miromme Echerie wrote:

Show me on the freighter doll where the catalyst shots wrecked it.

Bad luck, i do not follow the "CODE" and nothing happend.
I despise you without being a victim of you.
But somehow you do not want to understand that you are despised for what you do and HOW you do it and not because being harmed by you guys.
You can check some posts of Lucas Kell on this thread for more details.

I *would* point (with a finger) at a place above your eyes, but i don't

Miromme Echerie wrote:

It's not useless.

It *is* usesless.
It is proven by a long discussion i linked and some screenshot i linked.

Miromme Echerie wrote:

So it gets revoked.


For being AFK in station.
Or the codie being in bad mood.
Or because its raining.
< insert other lame excuse here >

permits are useless and are a badge of shame since it shows that one submitted to a bunch of very unsmart people.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#56 - 2014-11-03 15:07:58 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
But they aren't bot aspirant.
What, because they said so? Here's a tip. If you die to a suicide ganker, you were probably a bot aspirant. And when I say "probably", I mean 99% or higher that you weren't paying enough attention to warp out when neg tens enter local.

As for the remainder, tiny as it may be, well. I don't have to justify PvP in a PvP game. If you are mining in the first place, get used to the idea of being shot at.
Do you know what the word "aspirant" actually means? I'll give you a clue, it doesn't mean "have one single element of your playstyle remotely in common with another". You could argue all miners are bot aspirant because they use mining barges, just like some bots. All traders are bot aspirant because the update orders, just like some bots. All players are bot aspirant because they log in, just like bots.

And no, you certainly don;t have to justify anything. It's completely understandable why they target who they do, it's simply not in line with what they claim is the problem with highsec, since their actions are more likely to make botters and "bot aspirants" more effective, not less, while punishing a player who is just playing the game.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#57 - 2014-11-03 15:09:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Abrazzar
Quote:
'El-ahrairah, your people cannont rule the world, for I will not have it so. All the world will be your enemy, Prince With A Thousand Enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first, they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.'
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#58 - 2014-11-03 15:14:39 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:

In the case of the null/hisec reward debate, I believe my position was: "if nullsec is so sh*t, and hisec so great, why the f*ck are 30,000 people paying the null blocs billions upon billions a month for the privilege of living in null."

.... the fact that so much space is rented is the answer to the question....

That only answers the question of why do renter alliances own so much space, not the question of why there are 30,000+ renters in the first place. And no, "they are stupid" is not a good way to support your position, anymore than saying "you are wrong."
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#59 - 2014-11-03 15:16:29 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
But they aren't bot aspirant.
What, because they said so? Here's a tip. If you die to a suicide ganker, you were probably a bot aspirant. And when I say "probably", I mean 99% or higher that you weren't paying enough attention to warp out when neg tens enter local.

As for the remainder, tiny as it may be, well. I don't have to justify PvP in a PvP game. If you are mining in the first place, get used to the idea of being shot at.
Do you know what the word "aspirant" actually means? I'll give you a clue, it doesn't mean "have one single element of your playstyle remotely in common with another". You could argue all miners are bot aspirant because they use mining barges, just like some bots. All traders are bot aspirant because the update orders, just like some bots. All players are bot aspirant because they log in, just like bots.

And no, you certainly don;t have to justify anything. It's completely understandable why they target who they do, it's simply not in line with what they claim is the problem with highsec, since their actions are more likely to make botters and "bot aspirants" more effective, not less, while punishing a player who is just playing the game.


No worries Lucas. Their definition of "aspirant" is anyone who manages to enjoy the game through PvE activities in highsec. That's the absolute death knell for their vision of the game, where highsec is a miserable place to play, with high risk and minimal rewards, and everyone is forced into the big nullsec powerblocs. How this would help the game, no one is quite sure, but apparently that fact hasn't stopped these folks from lighting 450 billion ISK on fire in a failed attempt to make highsec inhospitable for PvE players.
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#60 - 2014-11-03 15:18:10 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I don't have to justify PvP in a PvP game.


Yea, you would like that.

Ganking and PvP would not be a problem. It is however a problem what and how codies are doing it and the discrepancy between the arguments that codies give why and what they are doing it and why and what they are really doing.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."