ya you can stop with the disruptive forum bullying to silence the voices coming after these high sec scammers.
2 Likes
Pretty great that people are still debating whether or not this every day standard opreating procedure is allowed.
1 Like
it is and you can continue to argue the fact all you want, i have had it demonstrated to me as a delay tactic by Safety people. This forum disruption is only meant to keep the exploit protected.
if you have a problem with that then have CCP remove it from the list of known exploits.
1 Like
No according to CCP. ĀÆ\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
1 Like
Ehhhh, if anything Iāll file a petition that the folks in charge keep it how it is because the wording seems to confound some people who want to read one thing when it in fact says another and that is fairly entertaining to me.
1 Like
prove it
the fact that the same people jump to the defense of the obvious exploit every time it is brought up proves it is more then anything else. Without your voice, bans would be going out.
1 Like
Typical lazy carebear:
he said it would not be implemented if used defensively but this same quote is used every time the exploit is brought up as well. Also no changes means that the page is the definitive answer as well. It is very interesting how you guys use the same obscurity every time to defend the current use of the exploit.
1 Like
Dumbass, a Suicide gankā¦
Successful or not, results in a ship loss, then the ganker(s) have to lose another ship, usually to pull Concordā¦which does not result in delayed timeā¦
in 0.6 it still takes 11 seconds to spawn on target and fire whether Concord is off grid or they are on grid at 152km away.
The exploits you are talking about are when you used to be able to throw cans and during a gank that Concord would shoot first before firing on the actual gankerā¦ Even now drones fire once, maybe twice if used to in a gank way before Concord arrives and stop movingā¦and concord kills the player ship b4 engagin any drones.
Understand what you are talking about b4 opening up your crap stained pie hole!
2 Likes
we reserve the right to change this at a future date.
So forum discussions are a way of vetting changes. So the issue at hand is they canāt tell if concord is used defensively or for exploiting and they donāt want to go wading through the weeds. But there may be simple of ways of stopping it that does not stop defensive use.
1 Like
As in, people who keep themselves up to date on CCP policies? I would hope that was true of everyone.
Clearly in your case, that isnāt so and all this stupid posting is the result.
If you think pulling CONCORD is bannable, then go submit a ticket and report someone for it.
Crying in the forum about the fact that CCP have ruled that both pulling CONCORD and defensive spawning of them (which are 2 different things) are are currently permitted just makes you look stupid.
1 Like
so i have to be a policy wonk just to get involved in the discussion. I think your delusional that your world matters to the complaint process.
No, no one needs to be. Thatās a choice you made I guess.
1 Like
Yeah Scipio, we have the right to be completely ignorant and uneducated and assert whatever we believe as truth on very highly charged topics involving permanently removing people from the game!
1 Like
sorry dude your world is so bleak that you think that matters, either way whatever bull crap that has happened in the past, it needs to change because it is driving paying customers from the game. CCP needs customers now.
Yeah! We should turn Eve into Wow!
1 Like
LOL! High sec exploiters are hardly paying customers. Well i guess they have to look at the decline we see now and decide if status quo is enough.
with the exploit change you can still suicide gank, that wont stop. you just dont get a guaranteed kill.