These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Would this tactic be effective against "hyper dunking?"
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#41 - 2015-05-26 13:11:12 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Effective? Yes.
Difficult to pull off reliably? Also yes.
Bound to create a threadnought as the GMs' can't provide an official answer? Very yes.


It kind of blows up the attempt by some of the anti-gank posters to appear 'reasonable' lol.

They always say "ganking is ok, it just should not be so easy or so cheap!". Someone comes up with a ganking method that is not easy, not as cheap and that exposes the ganker to more danger/risk of failure, but instead of them saying "well, that's ok, it meets our standard of effort", they find other ways to claim that it's bad and should be removed...exposing the truth of their belief that ANY ganking should be banned, no matter how much effort it takes.
Anthar Thebess
#42 - 2015-05-26 13:26:23 UTC
Best defense for your freighter :
Fly always with pair of T2 logi and a machariel bumper/webber.

Pair of logi will protect you from hyper dunking , as their reps should keep up base tactics.
Machariel job will be to bump off bumpers and provide extra web while you align your freighter, and warp off.

Don't forget about links in the system and nomad set.

I think thats all.
Pirate

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#43 - 2015-05-27 19:43:07 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Damen Apol wrote:

I'm partially wondering if having two ships/characters from the same account online in space would be considered an exploit of some sort? I'm also partially wondering if that would even work or if the ability to have multiple characters in space (albeit not under your control) from a single account has further ramifications.


Why would it, that's complying with the official game mechanics? Smile

Freighters get footballed for hours just because. Pirate

...And they all crave one thing - ISK. ¤

[WTS] ME10 / TE20 BPOs from Battleships/Cruisers to Fighters, Carriers, Triage/Siege, XL modules & Cap Components
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#44 - 2015-05-28 05:15:37 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Fly with an escort.
Good scout + web alts.
Web alts can also ECM.


and die in the process...

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2015-05-28 07:10:26 UTC
Sorry OP, but you need to realize the fact that using capital ship sized transports in high sec is suicide. They keep telling you to use scouts, watch kill boards, bring ECM and other things, but the dirty secret is none of that matters. If they want to suicide gank you - you will die. It is far too easy to bump with neutral alts who can't be touched. Use throw away suicide aggression noob ships. Suicide Blackbirds to ECM your webbing alt. The list goes on.

They keep feeding this misinformation so you keep hauling with capital sized transports and thus, allow them to keep suicide ganking.

My advice is to take away their target by not flying that stuff. Then watch the forums flood with suicide ganker tears. Cool
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#46 - 2015-05-28 10:24:43 UTC
000Hunter000 wrote:
Now a while ago there was another thread talking about bumping someones ship again and again.

Now i do remember (a long time ago) it was considered griefing if u kept on bumping someone thus preventing them from going into warp (note that i don't mean bumping a wartarget so he can't align, but bumping a neutral target in hi sec.)

I asked the same question then but I never got an answer from a dev.

Offcourse maybe it's only griefing if u bump them and don't suicide gank them.

IMO, atleast they should change the system so if u bump someone repeatedly u will get flagged to that person so they can shoot at you Twisted

Atleast this way the bumper has a risk as well, i mean it's a sandbox right?


The way I understand it is that if you, for example, follow a mining ship through all the belts in ONE system and bump them at every opportunity that is considered fair and legal by CCP. But if you follow them into more than one system or multiple systems that is griefing/harassment and could be petitioned and acted upon by CCP.

Bumping alone to move someone on out of your 'territory' in any sec status system or bumping followed by ransom demand or bumping followed by suicide gank are all legal tactics. 'Hyperdunking' is still legal although I have personally challenged it ingame in local with CCP devs. Needless to say I lost that argument. Smile

I don't personally feel that bumping should be made illegal or result in suspect or limited combat status application. This is because in certain situations the only tactic left to move ships on is to bump them. I am coming from a resource protection & monitoring perspective here.

I do feel the amount of hauler/industrial ganking has gone over the top currently. This is probably due to a number of factors including but not limited to boredom in sov space, in-game politics, and poor tactics on the part of haulers(Overfilling, AFK, bad ship fittings etc.). If 'FozzieSov' turns out to be exciting we may see a drop off in the amount of industrial ganking. Have to wait and see on that one.
Damen Apol
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#47 - 2015-05-28 13:13:19 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Sorry OP, but you need to realize the fact that using capital ship sized transports in high sec is suicide. They keep telling you to use scouts, watch kill boards, bring ECM and other things, but the dirty secret is none of that matters. If they want to suicide gank you - you will die. It is far too easy to bump with neutral alts who can't be touched. Use throw away suicide aggression noob ships. Suicide Blackbirds to ECM your webbing alt. The list goes on.

They keep feeding this misinformation so you keep hauling with capital sized transports and thus, allow them to keep suicide ganking.

My advice is to take away their target by not flying that stuff. Then watch the forums flood with suicide ganker tears. Cool


I've never flown one and I have yet to see any ganker tears from that decision :(
Epic Name
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2015-05-28 16:32:22 UTC
"hyper dunking" Honestly, who makes up these stupid ******* names?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#49 - 2015-05-28 18:41:38 UTC
Epic Name wrote:
"hyper dunking" Honestly, who makes up these stupid ******* names?


Probably reddit.
Carrie-Anne Moss
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2015-08-06 00:23:32 UTC
Bethan Le Troix wrote:
000Hunter000 wrote:
Now a while ago there was another thread talking about bumping someones ship again and again.

Now i do remember (a long time ago) it was considered griefing if u kept on bumping someone thus preventing them from going into warp (note that i don't mean bumping a wartarget so he can't align, but bumping a neutral target in hi sec.)

I asked the same question then but I never got an answer from a dev.

Offcourse maybe it's only griefing if u bump them and don't suicide gank them.

IMO, atleast they should change the system so if u bump someone repeatedly u will get flagged to that person so they can shoot at you Twisted

Atleast this way the bumper has a risk as well, i mean it's a sandbox right?


The way I understand it is that if you, for example, follow a mining ship through all the belts in ONE system and bump them at every opportunity that is considered fair and legal by CCP. But if you follow them into more than one system or multiple systems that is griefing/harassment and could be petitioned and acted upon by CCP.

Bumping alone to move someone on out of your 'territory' in any sec status system or bumping followed by ransom demand or bumping followed by suicide gank are all legal tactics. 'Hyperdunking' is still legal although I have personally challenged it ingame in local with CCP devs. Needless to say I lost that argument. Smile

I don't personally feel that bumping should be made illegal or result in suspect or limited combat status application. This is because in certain situations the only tactic left to move ships on is to bump them. I am coming from a resource protection & monitoring perspective here.

I do feel the amount of hauler/industrial ganking has gone over the top currently. This is probably due to a number of factors including but not limited to boredom in sov space, in-game politics, and poor tactics on the part of haulers(Overfilling, AFK, bad ship fittings etc.). If 'FozzieSov' turns out to be exciting we may see a drop off in the amount of industrial ganking. Have to wait and see on that one.


You are incorrect
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#51 - 2015-08-06 00:52:13 UTC
Dude. Almost 3 months.

"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.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2015-08-06 00:53:59 UTC
Kashadin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kashadin wrote:

Why?



You really can't think of why? The whole "same account" part might cause a GM to raise his eyebrows.

If you don't believe me, by all means, put in a ticket and ask.



My argument against that was in the post you quoted.

If it is such a issue as to warrant banning a easy change would be to make any ships that belong to a toon on the same acct disappear as soon as another toon logs into the same acct, I'm sure gankers would love that idea.


Yep, sounds like "creative use of game mechanics" to me. It would be incredibly hypocritical of CCP to ban a hauler using this legit mechanic to rep their ship in space considering how far the gankers are going to bend the rules.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#53 - 2015-08-06 00:54:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Carrie-Anne Moss wrote:
Bethan Le Troix wrote:
000Hunter000 wrote:
Now a while ago there was another thread talking about bumping someones ship again and again.

Now i do remember (a long time ago) it was considered griefing if u kept on bumping someone thus preventing them from going into warp (note that i don't mean bumping a wartarget so he can't align, but bumping a neutral target in hi sec.)

I asked the same question then but I never got an answer from a dev.

Offcourse maybe it's only griefing if u bump them and don't suicide gank them.

IMO, atleast they should change the system so if u bump someone repeatedly u will get flagged to that person so they can shoot at you Twisted

Atleast this way the bumper has a risk as well, i mean it's a sandbox right?


The way I understand it is that if you, for example, follow a mining ship through all the belts in ONE system and bump them at every opportunity that is considered fair and legal by CCP. But if you follow them into more than one system or multiple systems that is griefing/harassment and could be petitioned and acted upon by CCP.

Bumping alone to move someone on out of your 'territory' in any sec status system or bumping followed by ransom demand or bumping followed by suicide gank are all legal tactics. 'Hyperdunking' is still legal although I have personally challenged it ingame in local with CCP devs. Needless to say I lost that argument. Smile

I don't personally feel that bumping should be made illegal or result in suspect or limited combat status application. This is because in certain situations the only tactic left to move ships on is to bump them. I am coming from a resource protection & monitoring perspective here.

I do feel the amount of hauler/industrial ganking has gone over the top currently. This is probably due to a number of factors including but not limited to boredom in sov space, in-game politics, and poor tactics on the part of haulers(Overfilling, AFK, bad ship fittings etc.). If 'FozzieSov' turns out to be exciting we may see a drop off in the amount of industrial ganking. Have to wait and see on that one.


You are incorrect
Much as I hate to say it, Carrie is right. Harassment by bumping is defined in the C&P sticky and somewhat summarised below, as is active evasion.

GM Karidor, over multiple posts in one thread, wrote:
... CCP considers the act of bumping a normal game mechanic, and does not class the bumping of another player’s ship as an exploit. However, persistent targeting of a player with bumping by following them around after they have made an effort to move on to another location can be classified as harassment, and this will be judged on a case by case basis...

...You are mistaken. If you are reported and we find you actively following around a target without a war to continue bumping a specific player, it will still (at some point) considered harassment, even if you divert your 'attention' a little while doing so. If you have a bone to pick with someone, declare a war and take the risk that your target may actually taste blood and fight back (or finds allies for that part)...

... While it will involve inconvenience, we will have to see that one actively tried evasion before we consider someone being followed around and harassed. Merely changing belts in the same system or moving a few thousand meters to another asteroid would not qualify in this regard. Ideally you would move to other systems and more than just one or two jumps to avoid being found again quickly, requiring some effort to locate you again (i.e. through locator agents)...

... Depends, see the answer to the quote above which should cover this as well. If the victim just moved next door, that could still be interpreted as 'general area of operation', if the miner starts changing regions and is still being followed around by the same person that keeps bumping in a regular manner then the intent is pretty clear. Note that I said person, not character, so regional alts will be considered be the same player in this regard.
The edit is mine, all of the quotes are sourced from page 1 of that thread if anybody wishes to read the relevant posts in full.

Meh only just noticed that it's a CAM revived zombie of a thread.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#54 - 2015-08-06 00:55:29 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:

Yep, sounds like "creative use of game mechanics" to me. It would be incredibly hypocritical of CCP to ban a hauler using this legit mechanic to rep their ship in space considering how far the gankers are going to bend the rules.


Since apparently the necro was successful, I'll go ahead and reply until the GMs lock this.

No matter what you might think about ganking and bumping, we don't ever have two characters logged into the same account at once, nevermind assisting itself. No matter what you can spin, you cannot justify that.

"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.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#55 - 2015-08-06 00:56:34 UTC
Kashadin wrote:


That being said I think that it is highly unlikely to work as it would require you to be ganked in a place that you have the 2nd toon and for you to:

1: Log into the the new
2: Get in system
2: Land on grid
3: Lock Freighter
4: start reps and have them land

All the while your ship has lost any bonuses from piloting skill, is now sitting there like a lump (to be fair it was pretty much doing this before), and the ganker is still shooting you. If you can manage all this then you were prolly not going to die anyways.


In the case of hyperdunks in 0.5 chokepoints it's actually very likely to be able to meet all of these criteria with your logi alt and to save a freighter from an otherwise successful gank.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2015-08-06 00:59:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Since apparently the necro was successful, I'll go ahead and reply until the GMs lock this.

No matter what you might think about ganking and bumping, we don't ever have two characters logged into the same account at once, nevermind assisting itself. No matter what you can spin, you cannot justify that.

So what you're saying is if I keep you bumped and flagged until downtime on your only account, I can effectively prevent you from playing the game forever. You can't even log onto your market alt without risking a permaban. Seems reasonable.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#57 - 2015-08-06 01:05:09 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:

So what you're saying is if I keep you bumped and flagged until downtime on your only account, I can effectively prevent you from playing the game forever.


If you don't make an effort to escape, you can be bumped for a while, so long as I demand a ransom.

And no, clicking "align" for the tenth or twentieth time doesn't count. Now, if all they're doing is bumping, then feel free to log off.


Quote:

You can't even log onto your market alt without risking a permaban. Seems reasonable.


I did not say that. I said that having two characters logged in at the same time, while one is actively assisting the other in space, on the same grid, is likely to get you in trouble.

And like I said to the others. If you don't believe me, feel free to put in a GM ticket and ask about it. Straight up, say "Am I allowed to log into two characters at once on the same account to have one rep the other?" You'll get your answer. I know you probably won't, because you're desperate to avoid a straight "no".

"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.
Bobb Bobbington
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#58 - 2015-08-06 01:08:29 UTC
What if you ganked the ganker by getting a cheap alt ship, MWDing to where he lands, and then getting his pod with smart bombs when his ship explodes? They'd have to give up sometime... maybe?

This is a signature.

It has a 25m signature.

No it's not a cosmic signature.

Probably.

Btw my corp's recruiting.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2015-08-06 01:08:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:

So what you're saying is if I keep you bumped and flagged until downtime on your only account, I can effectively prevent you from playing the game forever.


If you don't make an effort to escape, you can be bumped for a while, so long as I demand a ransom.



No, I just need to have a valid gameplay reason. I could easily argue that keeping your market alt offline for the whole day is a profitable, PvP gameplay goal for me. (EDIT: no strikethrough? CCP forums I am disappoint)

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

I did not say that. I said that having two characters logged in at the same time, while one is actively assisting the other in space, on the same grid, is likely to get you in trouble.


That sounds like a pretty arbitrary distinction that will be hell on the GMs to field tickets about on an ongoing basis.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

And like I said to the others. If you don't believe me, feel free to put in a GM ticket and ask about it. Straight up, say "Am I allowed to log into two characters at once on the same account to have one rep the other?" You'll get your answer. I know you probably won't, because you're desperate to avoid a straight "no".


I have no horse in this race.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#60 - 2015-08-06 01:16:31 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:

No, I just have to make a profit. I could easily argue that keeping your market alt offline for the whole day is a profitable, PvP gameplay goal for me.


I would personally be hesitant to claim that as rationale. Ransom is so much simpler, and pretty much pre-approved by the GM staff besides. Nevermind that I genuinely suck at bumping.


Quote:

I have no horse in this race.


I couldn't tell, considering it certainly seems like you were arguing for the legality of having two characters logged in at the same time on the same account, one repping the other, and claiming that as a valid tactic because bumping exists.

If I'm wrong, by all means, please tell me what position you actually are taking here.

"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.