All mining and hauling guides should be updated to instruct gank victims to immediately report their deaths as rule-breaking by claiming that they were killed as a distraction in order for the gankers to more easily gank at a different point in the system.
So how much notice do you want?
Where do you want the notice placed?
Look on the bright side, all this mass undocking of noob ships is going to end. What’s not to like?
Excuse me for finding this funny though, I don’t think that this policy will stick though, on a serious note.
We have a long list…
Because that’s what decent people do.
Everyone deserves to be treated with respect end of.
4 Likes
So, what is the “defect in game client” that the GM talks about ?
AFAIK undocking ONE corvette to pull one spawn is not a bug abuse.
Even undocking 10 corvettes is not ; it’s an issue if the server is spawning several spawns for the same player (which it should not), but then it’s an issue that would be easily fixed by preventing people from undocking with a criminal timer.
Then that nerfs crime and punishment and loss of more ships.
You’re not going to get any real and official answers here but it’s very simple.
-
do things that shorten Concord reaction times for that location: not a problem
-
through sheer randomness and without an obvious pattern do something that delays concord response for that location: GM is probably going to decide that it wasn’t intentional and leave you be
-
repeatedly do things that delays concord response for that location where a GM might deduce that it is a pattern and done on purpose: GM’s gonna whack you
5 Likes
Random thought – If “pulling CONCORD” does indeed become known as an exploit and bannable, then every miner out there is going to have an alt which they shoot themselves with, so they can have their own little “pet CONCORD” ongrid with them 24/7
3 Likes
No it does not. Stop spreading nonsense.
It does not work this way. A concord spawn is “busy” as long as it has a target and this target is not dead.
When there is a criminal action, and there exists a concord spawn “not busy” in the system, then this concord spawn is warped after a delay. If there is no concord spawn, then the game spawns one around the placed of the criminal action.
Therefore, you need to make each miner in the system explode one alt at the same time to be sure they have a concord pet. Otherwise, when a miner alt attacks, a concord spawn will be moved a few seconds later, not created.
2 Likes
Stations have guns no?
Yes but that has always been the case. The problem is of course that this would require said miner to read forums or Reddit, be active, accept and adjust to that this is a pvp game and that effort is required, actually put in that effort.
In short, it’s not really going to happen.
1 Like
Now the upset is showing to start throwing that around. Calm down, this is not likely to stick.
And all it needs is another ganker or two to gank elsewhere and it is sorted.
New viable AG tactic though.
1 Like
You are mistaking “showing someone respect” with “treating someone respectfully”. there is no reason whatsoever to show that GM any respect because he made a questionable choice with the ban and CCP has not clarified anything with regards to concord pulling. But I have treated him respectfully because I have not thrown any slurs at him, I have not insulted him and I have worded my complaints and counterpoints against the behavior of this person respectfully. You ought to learn the difference before you treat me “unrespectfully”.
tbh, I’m not really sure how they would handle that because if a miner is doing this on purpose to pull concord to his belt then at the same time he is delayed that Concord for other belts.
wow! you think? asking some of these guys to think more than a step ahead is too much for them.
BINGO! i couldn’t have put it better myslef! you know what? let me make all thing simpler: logging into eve and undocking is an exploit from now on! there! done!
For me it’s super clear, if your intend is “to delay Concord for a future gank attempt”, it’s an exploit. If the delay for the future happens by an actual gank as a side effect, it’s not an issue. This was clear all the time from the broad exploit notification text, but bad CCP didn’t enforce it over the years.
One problem arising from this now is, that defensive spawning (with the intend to lower response time) is explicitly allowed, and more public knowledge.
If you want this addressed, I think best is to ask CCP for a change of Concord. Everything else is fruitless because the GM judgement and statement is in the world.
6 Likes
Now that have cleared that up I look forward to seeing a marked improvement in the content of your future posts 