■■■■■■■ coward.
4 Likes
A mining permit is the best deal possible.
2 Likes
He can just not even try and make the excuse he was in the wrong ship
ags finest
3 Likes
Shrug. Who cares if they quit? They can’t even figure out a simple rule like “don’t fly anything you can’t afford to lose”, they’re almost certainly going to quit soon anyway. At best maybe CCP gets another $15 payment before they do, but they’re still gone.
3 Likes
I was in the right ship for loot denial, it worked perfectly.
As if I care what your deranged mind thinks.
You obviously care given how much time you spend replying to everything I post.
3 Likes
There are always a minimum of 10,000 Procurer BPOs available, as they can be directly purchased from ORE stations (2 x stations in 4C-B7X and 2 x stations in NM-OEA) at 1.4B ISK each.
For someone that claimed to be a 2003 player and former FC of BoB, a run into Outer Ring should be no trouble, especially with how dead both Syndicate and Outer Ring have become.
That’s the rub with someone like @naari_naarian (and all associated alts of the player), when it’s shown that one thing is deliberately untrue, every thing else become questionable.
So for example, both of these statements cannot be simultaneously true:
The first was his first post on the forum. The second was what he started to claim 6 days later (and then edited his first post to try to delete it).
He was making the same claims in corp chat in game and on the Discord server he had setup. The best was the switch to 100% tax rate during corp PVE events he called.
Those weren’t just done for a joke. He called corp pve events and then during the event, switched the corp tax to 100% so that all bounties fed straight to Corp and then to him. When he was called out on it, he then claimed it was all just for a joke. Except it didn’t happen only once. He ‘jokingly’ did it every other time he ran corp pve fleets until others in Corp were quietly warned about it.
He was caught out many times, by several people that are regulars on the forum. The evidence to support the view that he was just scamming new players is all there.
Scamming is fine, but it doesn’t go without consequence.
Now as @sabus_narian he is doing whatever it is that his latest scam is, and consequences happen. This thread was a great example of that until it’s gone to crap in the last 3 days.
7 Likes
The first part of that statement doesn’t seem to be correct, however I’m totally with you on the so what.
You play within the rules, so it doesn’t matter from the perspective of the game, who you kill. If we all want to be able to approach the game how we like within the rules, then we have to respect that others have that same right. So you aren’t doing anything wrong.
It’s up to CCP to change the game if they think it’s a problem, and they’ve never said it is (and have repeatedly said it isn’t an issue for them).
However, I can see why Lucas would think your venture kills predominantly target new players, because they do. Here’s the profile of the age of your victims in Ventures, at the time of the kill:
That’s every venture kill from your 2199 kills.
When you add in other ships, the age moves:
That excludes capsules (so no double counting a character where you killed them in a ship and then got their pod in the same gank).
4 Likes
You put way too much effort into that, and clearly you’ve been scammed by the carebears.
Indeed, EVE is a game where people can make accounts anytime they want, and lots of 2006 veterans enjoy making new Venture alts so they can AFK mine in highsec.
I also find it outrageous that your biased study refers to these miners as ‘victims’. In fact, they are all convicted criminals and hardened felons.
4 Likes
yeah probably, but you’re worth it.
Fair point. I should have referred to them as criminals.
4 Likes
Awww, that’s so sweet Scipio! 
3 Likes
This is a somewhat misleading analysis for two reasons:
-
It doesn’t consider the average age in the target pool. If 90% of Ventures are flown by characters that are 0-1 years old but 80% of Aiko’s kills are 0-1 years old then they are actually killing fewer newbies than would be expected.
-
It only looks at age in whole-year increments. An 11 month old character is vastly different from a 11 day old character, to the point that calling them a 'newbie" isn’t really accurate anymore. But both characters go into the same bar on the graph.
3 Likes
Yep, it says nothing about the age of all venture pilots, but that doesn’t make it misleading.
The result can certainly be extrapolated out to many misleading conclusions, but just don’t do that.
Trying to frame it within a larger, unknown pool of all Venture pilots would be a misleading thing to try, because the data isn’t there for that. However, it’s not misleading for what it says in the title of the plot.
As Aiko also pointed out (and maybe she has lots of logs and evemails), new character doesn’t directly equate to new player, though it’s the best approach we have for measuring “newb” state in the game.
It doesn’t look at whole year increments at all. Only the x-axis is labelled in years, however each of those years has 12 bar plots, one for each month (the inaccuracy in that is that each month uses a CCP 30 day interval, so there is a 5 day error in character age in months that carries through to the right each year, but that doesn’t change the analysis).
The first bar for example contains characters from 0-30 days of age. It could be broken down further if desired, but months was just where I settled it given the amount of data.
2 Likes
NVM, you are correct about the age increments, I misread that.
But yes, the plot may say one thing, but it doesn’t prove the argument that a certain player is deliberately targeting newbies. For that you would have to establish that they are killing newbies by preference, rather than just killing everything they encounter regardless of age. And that would be proven by data showing newbie kills at a higher rate than “normal”.
Also remember that age in EVE is pointless due to alts, injectors and the age of EVE itself…
2 Likes
Nope. That couldn’t be concluded from any analysis, Aiko has said she isn’t and I totally believe that.
I know for myself, if there is a target, I don’t go checking age before I shoot. I shoot and it is what it is. I think that is generally true of most people in the game.
So not deliberate targeting new players in ventures, just that her venture kills end up mostly as new players, unintentionally.
They are outside rookie and career agent systems and are as valid a target as anyone else.
I would argue there’s only a partial truth to that, especially in the context of the statement that was originally made, that:
Most of the Ventures I kill are not ‘new’ players. Many of them have been playing the game longer than I have.
Aiko was created on 14/06/2018, so roughly 1 year 8 months ago.
From the graph above, it’s pretty clear that most of the character ages of those criminals in ventures are younger that 1 year 8 months.
The only way for the above statement to be correct would be that Aiko had contacted nearly all of her venture victims and they nearly all confirmed to her that they are older players, playing on new characters.
Might be just me, but that doesn’t pass the sniff test for reasonableness. I can’t see that it could be a correct statement, though that isn’t a dig at Aiko at all. She has a right to shoot them. They are criminals and deserve to die for their crimes.
3 Likes
I think it is a wonderful example how your putrid mind works, gankers blow up ships passing through to steal their loot, we try to oppose them to stop them from ganking and in your mind we are worse than the gankers. It is truly fascinating to see such mental gymnastics and stupidity. I reply because I find you absolutely hilarious. Keep going mate, I am having so much fun with your open insanity.
So 1.4bn in nullsec and 1.75bn to 2bn in Jita and I only found 5 on sale at the moment I looked. I see both points of view here.
I started again as Dracvlad having played before and I wanted to start anew, so I treated myself as a new player. I later admitted to some people that I had played before that and then on the forums. I have come across a lot of people who hide that they had played before.
I have been in corps which have done this to raise funds, I have also seen it done as jokes too.
Seems like many scammers have no consequences. If he is indeed one the intense hatred he is getting including the exploit war decs is a consequence. However I think that is more to do with him being vocal on the forums about wanting a better hisec.
You are so kind, you talk about consequences, well there was a consequence for Knowledgeminer for his actions in that he was seen to be ganker aligned in thought and action, even teaming up with CODE to gank, and the one that got him banned from AG was linking tears on this thread of people he bumped and ganked. Actions have consequences. In terms of the reply back and forth afterwards, I made the announcement for AG, but certain people wanted a forum battle so I indulged their desires and came out massively on top. Which is why you think it went to crap. Now we just have Merin Ryskin going off on what I can only describe as Anti-Ganking Derangement Syndrome.
Highsec Lobby Derangement Syndrome, seems to be a thing too…
It is so obvious that the target is new players, it is entirely intentional.
Yesterday I was helping my friend in Amarr, I did the one thing that stopped the gankers from ganking at the direction of my friend. After that was completed I amused myself by bumping the Tornados. A bit later after going AFK I did it again just for a laugh. The period from 15:41 Eve until 17:55 was covered by this main effort. My friend helped himself to a nice kill right and the CODE ones were disheartened by this act. Merin should note that this is the exact thing she had the impression we were not doing. 
And people try to tell me that we don’t stop ganking, and tell me that I am worse than gankers, so amusing…
This is how to do it!
It took eleven hours for them to muster up the will power to go for it again after that crushing blow, though it could be that they were AFK. But still 20 BC’s at 111m each lost for nothing. WINderful!!!
You do realise the BPOs from NPCs replenish, right? They are the ones with expiration date set to 365 days - a value longer than the max of 3 months we playes get.
If you find a station with just 1 unit, buy it, and a new one spawns immediately. You could keep buying them indefinitely if u had the funds. How do you not know this?
3 Likes
But do you realise that certain BPO’s only spawn in certain areas? The one referred to only spans in Outer Ring in Ore stations. So while you are indeed correct on what you say, it has no relevance to the Procurer BPO purchased in hisec . I am of course happy to help you understand things a mite better.
It was also why Scipios post was a little disingenuous when he raised it as an issue asking for 2bn for a Procurer BPO because most hisec miners would pay extra so as not to leave the comfort of hisec and risk being bubbled into a NPC nullsec station by trigger happy campers.
The fun I had getting out of a bubbled Ore station a number of years ago, you would have liked doing it, unless you were waiting in a hisec station for a BPO that would never spawn…