Dealing with suicide gankers

Communications Center General Discussion
89

You should totally petition it. CCP loves when people who have no clue about game mechanics try to space lawyer about it in a good petition.

1 Like
90

You dont have to be a space lawyer to see that it is an exploit.

91

You’re right as as it is written, it looks like an exploit. However this specific delay of concord by draging them somewhere else, is intended by CCP ; so it does not fall into the “delay” that would be a breach of the EULA.

So, you’re right, but actually it was done a way so you are wrong.

92

You have to be pretty dense and understand nothing about highsec mechanics to think this is an exploit. But go for it man

2 Likes
93

It is intentional that when a criminal act is perpetrated that Concord RESOLVE (this means that the criminal ship is jammed and explodes) the situation with the criminal in a set time depending on whether it happens in .5 to 1.0 space. Anyone outside of the criminal\victim\security system level equation doing something to alter those system security level determined intervals IS an EXPLOIT.

Otherwise it would be okay for me to DDOS Eve in order to pull off a gank. Induce the lag to where the Concord response was completely out of line to what it should have been.

94

I don’t see that listed on here.

The closest thing is: Exploit Notification - Delaying CONCORD Response | EVE Online
But that specifically mentions:

…distracting CONCORD by jettisoning ships or other items into space to distract them from attacking the perpetrator of a criminal act is now considered an exploit.

1 Like
95

So jettisoning a -10 capsule from a station, strategically timed, most certainly would qualify. It perplexes me the CODE. boys are running way from THEIR intent on this like scared little girls :smiley:

96

You’re wrong, deal with it.

1 Like
97

I am dealing with it because you CODE. boys aren’t man enough to actually face the punishment mechanic in Eve Online.

98

Concord doesn’t kill pods.

2 Likes
99

Hello all,

In order to clear up our current stance concerning this mechanic, I’m going to attach the ticket response I sent to Benny Ohu:

We do not consider intentionally spawning CONCORD using disposable ships an exploit at this time. This is, like all policies, subject to change in the future if deemed necessary for some reason, but we have no current plans to make any changes to this stance.

To put our stance quite clearly, we currently make no distinction between these two scenarios:

a. Suicide gank. CONCORD is spawned because Player A attacks Player B without the rights to do so.
b. Defensive spawning. CONCORD is spawned because Player A’s alt character attacks Player A without the rights to do so.

My best guess would be that the confusion stems from different rules having been broken. There are two exploits of sorts which I can think of which could have led to warnings being placed in a scenario similar to “b” above.

  1. Alt character recycling. It is considered a violation to recycle alt characters and/or trial accounts to bypass negative consequences. In this case, the consequences being escaped would be the standing hit for performing an unlawful attack in CONCORD protected space.
  2. Escaping CONCORD retribution. If a player somehow manages to prevent destruction at the hand of CONCORD after performing an unlawful attack, then it is an exploit. We are currently not aware of any such exploits, but there have been ways to do this in the past which have since been fixed.

Best regards, Lead GM Lelouch CCP Customer Support | EVE Online | DUST 514

100

I am not CODE.

1 Like
101

They probably undock in rookie ships. I stand corrected.

102

That what they all say. “My recollection of the events do not match her recollection of the events” :smiley:

103

I have never said that. Are you daft?

1 Like
104

I highly doubt an explanation will help here, but let’s try anyway.

There are three possible situations with CONCORD:

  1. When a new CONCORD squad spawns in a system (first gank in a given system after downtime).
  2. With a squad already spawned somewhere in the system.
  3. With a squad directly on the grid within 150k of a gank.

Timing:

  1. Some time T, based on the security status of the system
  2. T +6s
  3. Instantly

Time 2 (T +6s) is a completely regular CONCORD response time. It is an intended game mechanic. If you repeatedly gank in the same system you get time 2 for all but the first gank. Unless of course you want to gank on the same grid like for example in an ice field. Once CONCORD is on grid you get time 3 which makes ganking almost impossible, hence you move them away by ganking somewhere else or undocking in a noob ship while on criminal timer to once again get time 2.

Did you understand that?

2 Likes
105

So you are admitting you exploit the situation to avoid the police response that pertains to the sec status of the system? Got it.

Just dig deep and grow a pair. We both like a dangerous Eve… you just don’t like to play by rules you dont like.

106

Well I tried. Good luck with your petition

2 Likes
107

You surey will win this years “I am retard trophy”

3 Likes
108

Why is it that carebears always talk like this?
Is this some kind of internet badass talk an attempt to sound tough?
I don’t get it.

Also, it’s hilarious to see THIS MANY people, I’m assuming, like, fully grown, functional adults who play this game. THIS MANY actual adults, be so triggered and so scared of a group of roleplayers in a video game (yeah, CODE. is actually just a player group that roleplays in highsec with their ganking shenanigans), that they’d go on a forum crusade to cry about it.

I’ve never seen so many people get this buttmad over a bunch of roleplayers as I have in EVE Online’s official forums.

Like, CODE. is such a tiny fraction of the entire EVE Online ecosystem, but to carebears, it’s literally the only thing that matters to them. I don’t understand it.

4 Likes