Just to be clear, then, if someone jumps into a system with two chars - a Freighter and an Alt - and have the alt immediately shoot another player in order to bring Concord to the gate, while the Freighter aligns to warp, is that considered an exploit now?
Currently no, but give CCP 20 more days and they may try to wordsmith a way to cause mass confusion.
1 Like
You should ask Abyssal gankers that question?
The answer is no. Nothing at all has changed with the rules when it comes to CONCORD. Itâs perfectly ok for him to use the mechanic just as gankers use the mechanic.
Then perhaps ask them why they petitioned it? Obviously these gankers want the rules changed?
I dunno man. I dunno which gankers youâre referring to. That said you can be a ganker and not pull CONCORD. You can be a ganker and not agree with the use of the mechanic.
You can also be a hypocrite and petition against the very mechanic they themselves use. It doesnât matter nor does it bother me. I 100% dislike the cloak+mwd mechanic and will forever be vocal against it. I will still use it so I can be competitive.
My understanding is that this sequence of events all started when an Abyssal runner pulled CONCORD just before he returned, causing him to survive and resulting in some very upset gankers. I like to remind people of this because it is important to understanding why this is now an issue.
The MWD+cloak trick has counters.
It is also not a sure thing, server ticks can make a difference as can fits. I use this a lot and quite often it is not instant. There is something about the server ticks that sometimes leave you with some time left uncloaked before you get in warp. And instra locking Stileto could catch me when that happens.
Gankers have to get an interceptor on the DST, some do that, that guy in Odin/Ohide does that. Or you need to have friends do that role, like people do in nullsec.
At the end of the day this is what gives solo players a chance and CCP would be wise not to remove this trick, at least IMOâŚ
Still we are going off topic here.
Yeah man, you should not waste an opportunity like this to create a story around it that portrays the gankers as the villains and cry babies, if fabricated or not and no matter if it adds something to the discussion. At least it pushes your self image of âthe good guyâ and what is more important than that?
But do you even have any names?
Incidentally there is actually a story about a ganker and an abysmal runner that seems to be involved in all of this and who got the ban hammer around the time this all happened:
But he links the kill of the abysmal runner as the gank was quite successful.
Iâm sure that is just a coincidence that the setup seems similar and at the center of this events, but the outcome compared to the story you are telling is completely different.
Sadly the guy who told me this did not give any names, not even of the Abyssal runner, but he is not one to lie. So you can say it is not true if you want, feel free. By the way I presumed he lived for them to petition it, so that is on me not the person who told me. So if he died it makes it even funnier, in fact really funnyâŚ
As for being the good guy, who gives a damn about that, I just found it funny, and a real case of unforeseen circumstances when applied to its logical conclusionâŚ
But I do wonder why you want to push this white knight / good guy concept, in fact I often think that you lot are pretty much hung up on it, donât know why?
This is exactly the response I expected. Thank you
Happy to meet expectations.
1 Like
Drac the humor in the example youâre trying to point out is growth. As long as I can remember your average carebear had little or no knowledge of how to use mechanics such as these in their favor. They would do very little to protect themselves other than what was built in and provided by CCP. If it required thought or effort - nope, not gonna happen. Instead they would just endlessly complain to CCP, crying for nerfs and sending in bogus petitions.
Now you still have the crybabies and the petitions but if your example is true, you have people finally adapting and playing smart with mechanics. So after years and years of being the center of crying and bogus petitions you can bet that itâs only fair to turn point the finger at them as well.
Everyone thinks mechanics are cheap or dumb when they are on the short end. Thatâs human nature in todays society especially. So instead of using every fiber of your being to demonize people that play the game utilizing unique or out of the box mechanics, maybe celebrate that CCP hasnât yet completely molested the game beyond recognition.
I welcome most almost all uses of mechanics⌠grey areas included. If CCP is too disconnected and blissfully ignorant to ignore mechanical issues within their game after being made aware - thatâs on them.
1 Like
I would do what that Abyssal runner did in terms of CONCORD, which is why I am so amused by it.
The Abyssal runner has control on it, so can do it at the right time. It is an important distinction to make and I donât know why you want to ignore that important aspect to this mechanic in terms of blaming AG for not using it. Because when AG used to do this against freighter gankers the gankers would just keep bumping the freighter and pull concord away and then come in. Now it has value because the gankers have to go for it there and then.
The ceptor would need to catch the dst with 5 points if the dst activates a wcs, not likely.
The fact that every abyssal gank I see is done with Tornados in 1.0 or 0.9 tells me that CONCORD on grid doesnât matter at all. In fact the narrative based on something akin to âI heard from my brotherâs wifeâs best-friendâs hairdresserâ is nothing more than you pushing an agenda here.
The Crime and Punishment sub-forum used to be a pinnacle of truth. Unsubstantiated claims and grand stories devised to meta-game were uncovered and the author shamed. If @Noragen_Neirfallas was here you bet C&P would be in tip-top shape.
1 Like
I have seen them done with Thrashers and Catalysts, it depends where they are of course.
He is most definitely not a hairdresser, going off on side tangents and insults is normally what people do when they try to deflect. Simply put the gankers decided to petition an Abyssal runner doing this and caused a mess. It is just funny how it happened.
You seem to be a little bit behind the times, DSTâs have +2 warp strength, so add a single WCS that is a strength of +3 so four needed if of course the ganker is relying on the interceptor alone, except he has a fast locking ship with the required points that should be able to get the DST locked and pointed if the ceptor does its job.
And tell me, why can the guy on Odin/Ohide do this then?
You lost me there. Are you saying a WCS only has a strength of 1 ?
- Warp Core Stabilizer I
- Activation cost: 80 Gj
- Active Duration: 10 seconds
- Reactivation Delay: 150 seconds
- Maximum number able to be fitted: 1
- Warp Scramble Strength: -2 <-------------------------------------
- Targeting range reduction: -40%
- Scan resolution reduction: -40%
- Drone Bandwidth Penalty: -50%
I have never baited Concord with another character for protection as I only have 2 - I usually just risk it. Im a bit out of the loop in Eve mechanics as Im logging on once in a blue moon (my latest spell being these last few days), and I dont want to risk getting banned out of technicalities.
Are you sure Zaera is the one behind the times?
1 Like
So a âfailed gankâ is actually pulling Concord.