Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gankstalisiouz
|
Posted - 2010.07.03 19:14:00 -
[1]
Please consider the following scenario:
A pos is highsec is reinforced. The corporation that own's it drops from their alliance and sheds the war dec exactly 24 hours before the reinforced ends. This leaves them in a position where no-one can declare war on them for 24 hours, thus making it impossible to shoot the pos when it comes out of reinforced.
Is this a viable tactic to save pos's from destruction, or would it be considered an exploit?
Thanks in advance for your advice's and replies
|
Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
|
Posted - 2010.07.03 23:02:00 -
[2]
This forum is "Warfare and Tactics" not "Failure and Cowardice". What you need is a bunch of friends with beefy battleships and some e-war and tackle support to counter-attack when the POS is out of reinforced. If you've got more than 24 hours, there's no excuse not to get some mercs on your side.
Just so I'm not banned for trolling: Yes, I think your other plan would work, too.
... Join M. Corp, see the Galaxy |
captain foivos
|
Posted - 2010.07.03 23:31:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker This forum is "Warfare and Tactics" not "Failure and Cowardice".
This, and I believe that doing so would be considered an exploit.
Originally by: CCP Shadow
If you're going to quote me that's great, but it must be something I've actually said. Shadow.
|
Marzossis
|
Posted - 2010.07.04 03:52:00 -
[4]
I have seen this work on several occasions. However, it only buys you time because once out of the alliance the corp can be wardecced in its own right. Therefore, the real thing to do is get the shields repped and the guns repped so that you can tuck the pos away safely in a station and get it out once the threat has passed.
|
Loqiel
Caldari Legio Fortunae Everto Rex Regis
|
Posted - 2010.07.07 15:36:00 -
[5]
It's cowardly when a corp in an alliance drops to avoid POS death.
It's hilarious when an entire alliance disbands with a couple POS in reinforced to avoid their destruction, only they forget that the head corp in the alliance owns the POS and the war dec continues with them anyhow.
Not that I've blown up a POS like THAT before...
"A good plan executed violently now is better than a perfect plan executed sometime in the future." -Gen. George Patton |
Tira 0'TooIe
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 13:56:00 -
[6]
It's a valid tactic. It's got nothing to do with cowardice. If you aren't able to save the POS any other way, why the **** should you let it get blown up? People who say stuff about cowardice are stupid. There's no such thing in EVE. There is only what works and what doesn't. Do what you must to win. End of discussion. |
Victor Dreadwolf
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 15:47:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe It's a valid tactic. It's got nothing to do with cowardice. If you aren't able to save the POS any other way, why the **** should you let it get blown up? People who say stuff about cowardice are stupid. There's no such thing in EVE. There is only what works and what doesn't. Do what you must to win. End of discussion.
Are you advocating the use of an exploit? Because it looks like you are.
|
Tira 0'TooIe
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 16:10:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Victor Dreadwolf
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe It's a valid tactic. It's got nothing to do with cowardice. If you aren't able to save the POS any other way, why the **** should you let it get blown up? People who say stuff about cowardice are stupid. There's no such thing in EVE. There is only what works and what doesn't. Do what you must to win. End of discussion.
Are you advocating the use of an exploit? Because it looks like you are.
It's not an exploit. See my first sentence "It's a valid tactic." |
Loqiel
Caldari Legio Fortunae Everto Rex Regis
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 18:06:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe
Originally by: Victor Dreadwolf
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe It's a valid tactic. It's got nothing to do with cowardice. If you aren't able to save the POS any other way, why the **** should you let it get blown up? People who say stuff about cowardice are stupid. There's no such thing in EVE. There is only what works and what doesn't. Do what you must to win. End of discussion.
Are you advocating the use of an exploit? Because it looks like you are.
It's not an exploit. See my first sentence "It's a valid tactic."
Spoken like a true carebear. |
ShahFluffers
Gallente Ice Fire Warriors
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 19:47:00 -
[10]
I remember reading somewhere not that long back that this was considered an exploit by the Devs. _______________________
"Just because I look like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
|
SerSlevin
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 19:52:00 -
[11]
"To a surrounded enemy, you must leave a way of escape." ~ Sun Tzu
|
Arkady Sadik
Minmatar Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 20:20:00 -
[12]
Originally by: ShahFluffers I remember reading somewhere not that long back that this was considered an exploit by the Devs.
We petitioned this just a few weeks ago and got told it's a valid use of game mechanics.
It's a bit annoying, because it makes the tower pretty much impossible to attack. You can dec the corp with a second corp right after the drop the alliance, though - that gives you a dec that goes live right when the main dec ends. Hop people to the second corp, and you should be able to shoot the tower.
Annoying, though.
|
Tira 0'TooIe
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 20:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Loqiel Spoken like a true carebear.
See how stupid you are? I'm a pvp'er who learned it from a merc corp in a previous engagement, so STFU.
Originally by: ShahFluffers I remember reading somewhere not that long back that this was considered an exploit by the Devs.
Devs don't talk about exploits, they refer you to the petition system. What you're thinking of is a pattern of leaving and returning to the alliance to avoid wardecs. Corps can leave an alliance any time they like. I'm not proposing this as a permanent behavior. The OP is looking for a way to save a POS and proposed a tactic. It's valid as long as he doesn't do it more than once with the same corp/alliance. |
Mithfindel
Aseyakone
|
Posted - 2010.07.08 21:38:00 -
[14]
Yes, while this is a bad form, it is entirely legal - as long as the corp doesn't join back to the alliance right away after the POS has been saved.
So, leaving alliance for good, no matter what the situation - allowed. Back and forth alliance hopping to avoid a wardec - exploit.
So, if done several times a row (assuming the aggressor would persist on declaring war again on the corp), it is an exploit (though naturally, GMs decide that).
Similarly, if the corporation in question joins an alliance after a wardec and then soon after leaves the alliance (transferring the wardec to the alliance and becoming un-wardec'd itself) it is an exploit. If the corporation stays in the alliance (i.e. joined for actual help, not only to drop the war) joining an alliance during a war is of course allowed.
I am not aware if it has been ever been defined how long the corporation must stay in or out of an alliance for this not to be considered exploiting, but I assume it would be the period of a single war payment or one week. If this information is required, then you likely should petition the issue and preferably ask to have your petition escalated to a senior or lead GM.
|
Loqiel
Caldari Legio Fortunae Everto Rex Regis
|
Posted - 2010.07.09 14:00:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Loqiel on 09/07/2010 14:00:40
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe
Originally by: Loqiel Spoken like a true carebear.
See how stupid you are? I'm a pvp'er who learned it from a merc corp in a previous engagement, so STFU.
My apologies. Your Battleclinic page is truly massive. How could I possibly not recognize the great Tira 0'TooIe.
"A good plan executed violently now is better than a perfect plan executed sometime in the future." -Gen. George Patton |
K'racker
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.07.09 17:47:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Loqiel Edited by: Loqiel on 09/07/2010 14:00:40
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe
Originally by: Loqiel Spoken like a true carebear.
See how stupid you are? I'm a pvp'er who learned it from a merc corp in a previous engagement, so STFU.
My apologies. Your Battleclinic page is truly massive. How could I possibly not recognize the great Tira 0'TooIe.
schooled by a "carebear". how's that feel?
|
Hasenpfeffer
|
Posted - 2010.07.10 21:33:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Hasenpfeffer on 10/07/2010 21:33:36
Originally by: captain foivos
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker This forum is "Warfare and Tactics" not "Failure and Cowardice".
This, and I believe that doing so would be considered an exploit.
Let me see if I've got this right:
If you're a griefer and you want to steal something from someone, or kill them and get away with it, it's totally cool if you come up with convoluted strategies and borderline exploits to get the job done. If you don't like it you are a tree-hugger/carebear/wow player/need to htfu.
If you're an honest player that would like to employ a simple strategy to protect yourself from griefers, it's "failure" and "cowardice" and an exploit to avoid spending money/time/aggravation protecting what's yours.
The former is how this anarchic game should be played and the latter isn't -- I get it.
tl;dr: you're both tools.
|
Jason filigree
|
Posted - 2010.07.10 23:28:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Hasenpfeffer Edited by: Hasenpfeffer on 10/07/2010 21:33:36
Originally by: captain foivos
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker This forum is "Warfare and Tactics" not "Failure and Cowardice".
This, and I believe that doing so would be considered an exploit.
Let me see if I've got this right:
If you're a griefer and you want to steal something from someone, or kill them and get away with it, it's totally cool if you come up with convoluted strategies and borderline exploits to get the job done. If you don't like it you are a tree-hugger/carebear/wow player/need to htfu.
If you're an honest player that would like to employ a simple strategy to protect yourself from griefers, it's "failure" and "cowardice" and an exploit to avoid spending money/time/aggravation protecting what's yours.
The former is how this anarchic game should be played and the latter isn't -- I get it.
tl;dr: you're both tools.
DonĘt take it personally. Some people think anything but total victory by destroying your opponents is failure, and any failure where you still have assets remaining is cowardice.
These people do not understand that sometimes protecting your assets is a victory, and that fighting when you cannot win is stupidity, not bravery.
|
weebil
Amarr industrial apocolypse
|
Posted - 2010.07.11 05:37:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Gankstalisiouz Please consider the following scenario:
A pos is highsec is reinforced. The corporation that own's it drops from their alliance and sheds the war dec exactly 24 hours before the reinforced ends. This leaves them in a position where no-one can declare war on them for 24 hours, thus making it impossible to shoot the pos when it comes out of reinforced.
Is this a viable tactic to save pos's from destruction, or would it be considered an exploit?
Thanks in advance for your advice's and replies
I believe it is allowed. I also believe that a corp can drop from the wardeccing alliance and get an extended 24 hours war negating that tactic.
|
Cattegirn
Rampant SR
|
Posted - 2010.07.12 03:41:00 -
[20]
I think the devs intend the players to "game" Eve as much as they possibly can, until someone official stops you.
It's only a problem when seen through the eyes of someone who forgets that the only thing that exists are the game mechanics, rather than our preconceptions of what an alliance or war should be like. Just see 1's and 0's and you'll be fine.
|
|
Oathi
|
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:33:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Loqiel Edited by: Loqiel on 09/07/2010 14:00:40
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe
Originally by: Loqiel Spoken like a true carebear.
See how stupid you are? I'm a pvp'er who learned it from a merc corp in a previous engagement, so STFU.
My apologies. Your Battleclinic page is truly massive. How could I possibly not recognize the great Tira 0'TooIe.
Really now, you do research on anyone that disagrees with you? On battleclinic no less.
|
Sinister Dextor
|
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:09:00 -
[22]
Originally by: SerSlevin "To a surrounded enemy, you must leave a way of escape." ~ Sun Tzu
He was not advocating that you should let your enemies dock up, but that a surrounded enemy would fight to the death, whereas if they had some 'hope' of escaping , they would fight less fiercely. Note the word FIGHT.
|
Mal Lokrano
Gallente The Executives IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 20:32:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Mal Lokrano on 31/08/2010 20:32:18
Originally by: Loqiel Edited by: Loqiel on 09/07/2010 14:00:40
Originally by: Tira 0'TooIe
Originally by: Loqiel Spoken like a true carebear.
See how stupid you are? I'm a pvp'er who learned it from a merc corp in a previous engagement, so STFU.
My apologies. Your Battleclinic page is truly massive. How could I possibly not recognize the great Tira 0'TooIe.
Yup, my sarcastometer just exploded . ____________________________________________ When going to a party with wine, women, and song. Always ascertain the vintage of the first two.
Don't bug me ingame about diplomats, I don't know wh |
Thorian Baalnorn
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 20:42:00 -
[24]
Quote: It's cowardly
Funny how when carebears put the shoe on the other foot so many think its cowardly and exploiting.But when it done to the carebears, they are met with a " working as intended" line.
So ..... i will say working as intended on this one. Griefers and high sec "pvpers" use some of the most distasteful and dirty tactics in game to get one up on carebears. Then laugh about the emo tears.They have no right to call anyone a coward as griefing high sec carebears( in most cases) is probably the most cowardice thing i can think of in this game and i am not even a carebear.
I say if its a legal tactic, do and then LOL at the emo tears and smack.
|
Taedrin
Gallente White Haven Corp
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 03:25:00 -
[25]
Valid tactic - If the war deccers want to, they can apply a new war and attempt to take down the POS again.
However, if you try this multiple times, it will probably be considered an exploit. CCP has mentioned that repeatedly joining/leaving alliances is an exploit (see Imune alliance) ----------
Originally by: Dr Fighter "how do you know when youve had a repro accident"
Theres modules missing and morphite in your mineral pile.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 06:34:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Taedrin Valid tactic - If the war deccers want to, they can apply a new war and attempt to take down the POS again...
Right on the money.
Who's to say that they were not planning on quitting that alliance anyway? Sure the attack may have pushed the plans ahead but is not evidence in itself. If however they rejoin immediately after the dust settles ... then ask a GM through the PROPER CHANNELS!
On a sidenote: If you want to get the lootz and other e-peen enhancers, perhaps you should consider bullying someone more inclined to fight rather than what is evidently an industrial entity .. ie. the cowardice is all yours.
|
Aphrodite Skripalle
Galactic Defence Consortium
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 08:04:00 -
[27]
"So, leaving alliance for good, no matter what the situation - allowed. Back and forth alliance hopping to avoid a wardec - exploit." ----- No its not.
I am wardecing a corp thieve for over 1.5 years now. He is hopping from corp to corp every week. Its not an exploit, i already petitioned that. Its game mechanics. Its not griefing for me either.
I have a long discussion with that with several GMs. I repeat, its neither an exploit nor griefing, its just how eve works.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 09:43:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Aphrodite Skripalle "So, leaving alliance for good, no matter what the situation - allowed. Back and forth alliance hopping to avoid a wardec - exploit." ----- No its not.
Two entirely different scenarios. One is an individual changing corps like others do underwear other is corporation alliance hopping to stay ahead/away from declarations .. one is "meh" other is a severely frowned upon action.
|
Siko lawk
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 17:04:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Aphrodite Skripalle
I am wardecing a corp thieve for over 1.5 years now.
lol, bless
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |