Greedy Goblin

Monday, September 2, 2013

The fundamental difference between WGBWC and the New Order

I was member of The New Order of Highsec for months. I was their most productive ganker. I left them for being too lazy and too tolerant towards pointless harvesting of tears. I blamed the leader for being a Goon alt or simply incompetent in keeping the New Order from growing and making impact. I was wrong, there was a fundamental problem with the New Order that I only see now when I'm running my own movement.

The New Order has risen against AFK mining. We can agree that gaining wealth in a game without actually playing it is practically cheating. We all hate when AFK-leeches make the team lose in a WoW battleground, World of Tanks or League of Legends game. CCP already made changes that made AFK play harder (think of the ice change) and no game developer was ever able to completely remove AFK gathering or botting. In a game like EVE Online where players are encouraged to take matters into their hands, an organization fighting against AFK leeching is a good organization.

Now I have an organization fighting against using badly chosen ships or badly fit ships. Being dumb in games is a similar problem to being an AFK leech or worse: more games were lost to outright dumb players than AFK-ers. Why will we succeed when the New Order failed? Not because our goal is better. Not because "we are better people". Not because I'm better leader than James 315.

The fundamental problem with the New Order is arbitrary justice. Who is AFK is determined by a New Order agent and punishment is administered by his hand. It has two results: such organizations attract violent people who do violence just for violence. Such people will misjudge people and seek reasons to punish them instead of seeking fair sentence. Power corrupts. The other problem is that even perfect compliance to New Order rules does not provide safety for miners from anyone but the New Order itself. Therefore miners will only comply if the New Order is already so powerful that its punishment cannot be avoided. Since all organizations start as small, this means that the New Order meets with defiance and evasion instead of compliance.

We Gank Because We Care demands people to choose and fit their ships in a way to resist ganking. Such action is objectively judged. I mean if a WGBWC agent mistakenly or maliciously judge a ship "improper" and proceeds with ganking it, all he gets is a destroyed Catalyst and the miner trolling him while looting his wreck. "Gank resistant" ship is judged by the game server alone, my opinion or your opinion does not matter. You can come up with a very different fit from mine if you like. While I can proceed to try to gank it, I can only succeed if it wasn't good enough and I was right. If I failed, you were right and I was clearly wrong. The WGBWC agent holds no power to judge anyone, therefore he is not corrupted by power, nor the position attracts violent people.

Similarly, while a target can consider the whole WGBWC bad, he cannot blame the individual agent of wrongdoing. The blame "you don't keep your own code" was very common against New Order agents, exactly because of the opinionated justice. A WGBWC agent can't be blamed for being unjust. If your ship blown up, he was right. If your ship lived, he was already punished for his mistake and you can claim compensation by looting his wreck.

The other important point is that if you comply with the WGBWC demands, your ship becomes ungankable by not only WGBWC but by every gankers (remember, not even Miniluv ganks Procurers). You gain something from compliance even if you never see a WGBWC agent again in your life: there are and will always be various gankers in EVE. Choosing a proper ship and fitting it well protects you from all of them.


PS: if you are highsec security missioning, start training for large blaster specialization and Kronos marauder. The new rebalance will make it the ultimate mission boat. Its useless web bonus is turned into falloff bonus, so its optimal+falloff with a blaster will be 60km with tracking computer. The MJD bonus gives easy option to relocate, no more MWD-slowboating. And that's without going siege. The new siege module extend that to 70km while increasing its tracking below medium blasters. The siege bonus also makes it unkillable by rats by increasing resistances and repair amount even more. It also gives EWAR immunity, so no more trouble with ECM-ing rats.

PS2: gankers always post tears for entertainment. I get my fair share of tears. But I won't post from this collection of idiocy. Instead I post the anti-tears, miner mails and local chat screenshots where they learned. Here are two:

PS3: of course I don't leave you here without a moron! He was tanked, and usually I don't attack these because I don't have time left for the pod. But I made an exception because you must see his fit. What can I say, a Track-ie roleplayer.

27 comments:

antronics said...

"The fundamental problem with the New Order is arbitrary justice....Such organizations attract violent people who do violence just for violence."

..Gevlon, you still dont know what The New Order is about.

I EveMailed you about this almost a year ago. I told you that TNO was created for violence. To force CCP's hand. To draw a line in the sand and stop CCP from slowly pacifying Eve. That is the primary purpose of TNO.

Your reply to me was "I don't care one bit about James 315's message or the purpose of TNO."

The secondary purpose of TNO is not punishing fail fit miners, but punishing pilots who are not engaging in Eve online. Sitting at a roid is a pitiful way to spend your down time.

Eve is a violent game. TNO set to KEEP Eve a violent game. Let's get violent and emergent. There is no fundamental problem with TNO because it promotes and makes violence accessible. That is actually a fundamental success.

"Such people will misjudge people and seek reasons to punish them instead of seeking a fair sentence"

This starts out as a sound position until...

"if i failed, you were right and i was clearly wrong. The WGBWC agent holds no power to judge anyone..."

Why can't the "If I failed you were right and I was clearly wrong" criteria be applicable to a TNO agent? The TNO agent doesnt have the power to misjudge anyone just as the WGBWC doesn't have the power to misjudge. What is more fair of a sentence then "You have decided your tank. I have decided my gank. It is up to the game server to judge who is the winner"?

It works both ways Gevlon. What's good for WGBWC is just as good for TNO.

Contradiction and bias.

Gevlon said...

TNO theoretically doesn't gank badly fit, but active and responsive miners who paid their 10M. However an agent can find some excuse to gank him anyway.

New Order Logistics have 72 members. Yet its kills are
August 55.25b
July 50.18b
June 88.71b
May 71.48b
April 125.25b
March 146.27b
February 187.38b (46B mine)
January 103.94b (8B mine solo)
December 14.70b

I can't see how can you call this success.

Chris said...

Ungankable is relative.

The goblin thing to do to meet the killboard demands of your corp. is to gank in small fleets, since it counts ships to multiple players, it increases your success rate and it allows you to kill even properly tanked ships.
That turns 'we gank because we care' into 'we gank because we can'. Same abbreviation, different sentiment.

Anonymous said...

The tracking bonus on the Bastion module part of the Marauder Thread was a Typo. Its giving a 25% Optimal and Falloff Bonus. No Tracking bonus if that was, what you meant with "...while increasing its tracking below medium blasters"

Gevlon said...

@Chris: the rules say 5b SOLO ganks

maxim said...

I'm not with Antronics on praise for TNO, but he does make a good point in another part of his post.

If it is game-mechanically impossible for WGBWC agent to be unfair, why was it possible for TNO agent?

Gevlon said...

Because activity doesn't objectively protect you from ganking. A TNO agent can judge you to be inactive and gank you.

A WGBWC agent can't gank you if you are tanked, even if he is outright unjust.

Lucas Kell said...

@Gevlon:
"We can agree that gaining wealth in a game without actually playing it is practically cheating"
I disagree. As should you. The majority of trading is done while not playing. There's no difference between you choosing to spend maybe an hour a day in total changing orders, and a miner spending a total of an hour a day docking, unloading and returning to a roid. Only when automation is introduced is it cheating.

"We all hate when AFK-leeches make the team lose in a WoW battleground, World of Tanks or League of Legends game"
The difference with EVE is that someone else making isk doesn't cause me to "lose". My gameplay continues with or without afk miners.

"remember, not even Miniluv ganks Procurers"
I'm not sure if it's because you don't read, or you just don't care, but I'll try again. Miniluv kills procurers. The only reason they are rarely killing them is there is an order of preference based on the efficiency of a kill in reducing miner output. There are 3 metrics. 1. Ease of kill 2. Overall cost to miner 3. Effect on efficiency of miner.
A hulk is 1. Easy - 2. High - 3. High
A Retriever is 1. Easy - 2. Low - 3. Medium
An Orca is 1. Hard - 2. High - 3. Medium
A Procurer is 1. Hard - 2. Low - 3. Low

If all that was left were procurers, procurers would die. You mouthing off in a procurer, bearing in mine we KNOW you aren't a miner by trade, doesn't get you killed. The fact that you didn't get killed doesn't mean that if everyone was in a procurer miniluv would just go home. It's not like miniluv make isk off of any miner gank.

"New Order Logistics have 72 members. Yet its kills are"
... insignificant. Why do you feel the need to always boil success down to KB stats alone. I know you think the KB is some magical index that makes you a better person, but that's only what you think. How much do new order members get paid by those they are not ganking. A Retriever costs like 30m, but if that same retriever is paying you 50m to get a pass, then killing them and having them return in a procurer would be a worse choice for TNO. I don't even like TNO, yet even I can see that you can't measure their success or failure on KB stats alone.

"A WGBWC agent can't gank you if you are tanked, even if he is outright unjust."
You do also dual box to kill tanked targets now. Basically you want people to only fly Procurers and Skiffs. You provide a Retriever fit on your page, yet you would gank that fit too.

Let's also consider that because you are on your own, and are not likely to go beyond a member count of 5, you can only cover a couple of systems at a time. Regardless of what your KB says, the fact that in most place noone even cares you exists means you are unsuccessful. I had a fleet of alts out for most of yesterday in a 0.5 mining in yield fit mackinaws. Nobody came and bothered me.

How long are you realistically going to keep this up for before you realise it's a futile effort? You can continue to chest beat and say that your KB proves you are a success, but still, almost every belt or anom I go to is filled with untanked macks, retrievers, hulks and covetors. You spend all day ganking, but what's changed?

Gevlon said...

@Lucas: trading CANNOT be done AFK. Trading happen only when a player actively accept an order. It's true that the order setter doesn't need to be at the keyboard at this point, but the other guy has to. Until he arrives, I make zero income. On the other hand the AFK miner earn income from nothing.

Other people AFK gaining income does make you lose. He'll be in better ships or have more replacement ships next battle.

No point arguing over the theoretical situation of what Miniluv would do if there wouldn't be Hulks and Macks wandering around. We'll talk about that when we get to the point that the belts only have procurers, skiffs and empty-pod tanked retrievers.

It's easy to prove the importance of KB stats: imagine a ganking group with zero kills! They are obviously non-existent. Without reasonable amount of ganks, you aren't a ganker.

Indeed if the corp never goes beyond 5 members, it will be unsuccessful. That's what I was talking about. Success in metrics. If a year from now we'll still be just a few guys, I won't be able to say "hey we are having lot of fun lololol", I'll have to face defeat, exactly because you (and many others) could mine in untanked ships in 0.5 without having to bother. While I can't give the exact number of kills needed to be relevant (850B/month is failure 851B/month is success), a few guys and 100-200B/month is clearly failure, just like The New Order.

While I can dual-box kill a tanked retriever, I won't because it's stupid. I'm using 20M worth of ships + my time to kill a 35M worth of ship. I'm better off killing my own insured alt.

The project started 2 weeks ago. Anyone who wanted to join and doesn't have a catalyst pilot already trained couldn't even join. And you would already declare failure? It's a bit premature I'd say.


maxim said...

@Gevlon
Does this description of the difference fit? :
The difference is that while TNO played by a self-imposed rule (though shalt not AFK), and occasionally violated their own self-imposed rule (i'll gank you if you afk), WGBWC plays by the rules of Eve which are impossible to violate.

@Lucas
<< TNO and KB >>
Viability of KB measurement depends on whether you evaluate TNO as purely financial money-extortion protectionist racketeering enterprise (KB not good measurement in this case), or based on their stated mission of elimination of all AFK mining (KB is one of the main forms of measurement, then).

<< you want people to fly Procurers and Skiffs >>
Yeah, i gather this to be the endgoal as well. Actually, no. The true endgoal is for farmers to start actually flying in groups, bringing actual defensive ships along. You know, just as they would in a true pirate-infested Evespace.

The most curious part for me here is whether Gevlon can actually force people to fly Procurers and Skiffs through his actions. If he suceeds, he may very well become the first true pirate admiral of Eve :D

<< You spend all day ganking, but what's changed? >>
Don't tell me you actually expected change to happen in the span of less than a week.

Stuff like that takes months of dedicated effort.

daniel said...

afk income ...
production. i start the job, come back after it's done, and in the meanwhile have nothing else to do.
as with mining, i have to setup, have a look at what to mine/produce, have to sell.
yet nobody is raging against that.

i don't see no problem if somebody is mining, and leaves the comp for a piss, or grab more coffee/beer/food, he has to b back at the comp within minutes, to empty his cargo anyway.

this whole discussion is pointless.

this game is not about making isk as a sole reason.

if isk were to be the one and only goal in eve, yep, i would agree that afk income is shit.

i mean, wanted by ccp or not, there is a clearly visible ladder:
ratting - very active, high income / hour
mining - not that active, lower but still high income / hour
prodding - very inactive, low income / hour
pi - even more afk, very low income / hour
research agents - as afk as afk can be / super low income / hour


sorry for the eek a mouse quote, but:
no problem,
i don't see no problem,
i don't see no problem with that.

Lucas Kell said...

@Gevlon
"trading CANNOT be done AFK. Trading happen only when a player actively accept an order."
What? Are you simple?
As a trader, I can log on, set orders for 10 minutes, then log off. While I'm not logged on, my money will tick up. This is as AFK as I can possibly be. A Miner is no different, except he must remain logged on. He comes along, targets a roid, set's his strip miners on, then goes AFK. He returns to empty his cargo in much the same way as I would log my trader to change prices. You can't say you aren't earning isk while AFK.

"Other people AFK gaining income does make you lose. He'll be in better ships or have more replacement ships next battle"
This is nonsense. An AFK miner makes far less income than I do. I've never lost a battle and gone "onoes, that guy was an AFK miner!". Not to mention that that's beside the point anyway. Your comparison was to tasks in other MMOs where a member of your team would specifically be going against you winning. The only time it would be the same is when a guy I'm in a fleet with goes AFK.

"We'll talk about that when we get to the point that the belts only have procurers, skiffs and empty-pod tanked retrievers."
Which will NEVER happen. I can make more isk in a shorter time in a yield fit mack, despite the increased risk. And with a combination of you, TNO and miniluv, there's still around 95% of high sec free from gankers. Location is a big part of the risk analysis.

"It's easy to prove the importance of KB stats: imagine a ganking group with zero kills! They are obviously non-existent. Without reasonable amount of ganks, you aren't a ganker."
Which is fine, except TNO aren't gankers. They do a lot of bumping to stop afk miners, rather than ganking, and they exploit money from targets. You can't measure either of these things from a KB. While you can show their level of ganking is not as high, you can't declare they are a failure just because you don't think they ganked enough (well, you can declare it, but it's nonsense).

"Indeed if the corp never goes beyond 5 members, it will be unsuccessful."
Your number of members and number of kills is completely irrelevant to your success. Your success can't be measured on either of those metrics. Your goal is to teach miners to not mine in untanked and expensive ships. Your only metric of success is to measure the trend of miners. If you measure how many untanked miners there are now, then do the same measurement in a year, that will be your metric. Anything else is an interesting figure, but beside the point.

"While I can dual-box kill a tanked retriever, I won't because it's stupid. I'm using 20M worth of ships + my time to kill a 35M worth of ship"
You still do kill tanked targets, even though they are fit to your specs however:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=19469609
This guy was tanked, yet you killed him. He can now go to your page and read that he can tank his ship, yet it was already tanked. With kills like that, you may as well remove retrievers from your page. And 20m - 35m still puts a green in your KB.

"The project started 2 weeks ago. Anyone who wanted to join and doesn't have a catalyst pilot already trained couldn't even join. And you would already declare failure? It's a bit premature I'd say."
Well normally, I'd agree and say it's premature. But you declared miniluv a failure on day 2 of the ice interdiction, even though their goal "raise ice prices" had already been achieved. Since you are able to declare it so early, then so am I. The current trend of miners shows your operation to be a failure. You may as well pack it up.

Lucas Kell said...

@maxim
"Viability of KB measurement depends on whether you evaluate TNO as purely financial money-extortion protectionist racketeering enterprise (KB not good measurement in this case), or based on their stated mission of elimination of all AFK mining (KB is one of the main forms of measurement, then)."
Their website is minerbumping.com. Most of the time they operate miner bumping, to deny income to afk miners. This can't be measured on a KB, neither can the extortion. They also operate from NPC corps, and to be a member of TNO, you can be in any other corp too. So a KB is likely to be inaccurate, even if you were trying to find out how many ganks TNO perform.


"Yeah, i gather this to be the endgoal as well. Actually, no. The true endgoal is for farmers to start actually flying in groups, bringing actual defensive ships along. You know, just as they would in a true pirate-infested Evespace."
Except flying in groups and bringing defensive ships does nothing. Just the other day I organised a triple gank against targets grouped together, and ganking a target with multiple concord spawns and ECM is easy enough.

"If he suceeds, he may very well become the first true pirate admiral of Eve :D"
Gankers != Pirates. I know you like Gevlon and you'd love to see everyone with little Wanted posters for Gevlon saying "look out for this guy", but it's never gonna happen. I'm not worried about him even when I'm flying an untanked mack being barely at the keyboard for 8 hours, so I'm not gonna be hiding from him like he's some kind of dread pirate.

"Don't tell me you actually expected change to happen in the span of less than a week."
Stuff like that takes months of dedicated effort."
See my previous post. Miniluv was being judged on day 2. Gevlon himself has set the time scale here for how long he gets before he gets judged. He chose to jump on miniluv on day 2, so on that scale, by now he should be showing a lot of change or he's failed.

Landor said...

Eve has many forms of [semi]passive income sources:
* Research and Invention
* Planetary interaction
* POS reactions
* Station trading
* Production

All these activities require relatively small amount of time to set up and process continues without player attention while player can be AFK (either online or offline). All these require less attention than mining and are due that "more AFK" activities than mining. While most of these involve exposure to the risk of being ganked (while collecting planetary goo, moving produced goods or researched blueprints) then station trading is inherently safe, does not require undocking and no interaction with other players.

Given that you prominent representative one of the most safest AFK activities in the game, it was unclear why you so passionately hate other AFK miners.

I do understand (but do not agree with) New Order "if you are AFK, you are bot" argument, but until today it was unclear what drives you.

I think you answered it today with "Other people AFK gaining income does make you lose." - it is all about competition and perceiving Eve as zero-sum game.

Given that AFK miners are only demographic which you have ability to remove from game with high efficiency then this is where you have funneled your hate against competition.

maxim said...

@maxim
<< Their website is minerbumping.com. Most of the time they operate miner bumping, to deny income to afk miners. This can't be measured on a KB, neither can the extortion. They also operate from NPC corps, and to be a member of TNO, you can be in any other corp too. So a KB is likely to be inaccurate, even if you were trying to find out how many ganks TNO perform. >>
Fair enough.
However at this point i can turn your own argument against you. Just as you are saying that KB is not a way to measure teaching, bumps are not a way to measure afk mining.
Are there any collected long-term stats on how many afk miners are around?


<< Except flying in groups and bringing defensive ships does nothing. Just the other day I organised a triple gank against targets grouped together, and ganking a target with multiple concord spawns and ECM is easy enough. >>
Fair enough.
That's a game design flaw, i guess.
Did you break even KB-wise on that gank?

<< Gankers != Pirates. I know you like Gevlon and you'd love to see everyone with little Wanted posters for Gevlon saying "look out for this guy", but it's never gonna happen. I'm not worried about him even when I'm flying an untanked mack being barely at the keyboard for 8 hours, so I'm not gonna be hiding from him like he's some kind of dread pirate. >>
Oh, it can happen. You wouldn't believe the kind of stuff i saw happening in online universes, and Eve is no exception :D.

I'll grant you that it is a long way away from actually happening, though. Never mind that CCP might take issue with highsec becoming actually dangerous.

<< See my previous post. Miniluv was being judged on day 2. Gevlon himself has set the time scale here for how long he gets before he gets judged. He chose to jump on miniluv on day 2, so on that scale, by now he should be showing a lot of change or he's failed. >>
Simultaneous posting is a bad thing :(
Anyway, Miniluv failed one of the stated goals of crippling the supply of ice.

He didn't fail to create a wave of speculation, though. I don't value that effect much, however. Maybe i should, but to me it is just pixel money changing pixel hands. Not actual change in how people play the game.

Anonymous said...

Trading is super AFK.

I make most of my isk while not even connected to the client, and while sleeping.

Sure, there is a small amount of time setting up orders, but past that, its as AFK as you can get.

Couriers deliver stuff to my station, I list it, log out, come back a few hours later, a few days later, a few weeks later, and pick up the isk. What other profession in Eve has that ability?

Lucas Kell said...

@maxim
"Just as you are saying that KB is not a way to measure teaching, bumps are not a way to measure afk mining.
Are there any collected long-term stats on how many afk miners are around?"
Very true, but I'm not claiming to measure their success, I'm simply stating it's not possible to measure their lack of success form KB alone. Realistically from the outside with no access to CCP analytics, it would be impossible to tell whether they are a success or not.

"Did you break even KB-wise on that gank?"
Yup.
3 retrievers + 2 pods, we overkilled and took 12 due to ECM in the belt. All as T1s, just the retrievers alone would still break even with 45 T1 catalysts. Ganking is very easy to break even.

"Oh, it can happen. You wouldn't believe the kind of stuff i saw happening in online universes, and Eve is no exception :D."
Oh sure, it can happen. But it won't be Gevlon.

"Anyway, Miniluv failed one of the stated goals of crippling the supply of ice."
The goal was never to cripple ice, it was to raise the price so the CFC could get richer. That was a success. I got in quite late, and still made way more isk that I could have any other way.
We certainly don't aim to permanently change how people play.

maxim said...

<< Realistically from the outside with no access to CCP analytics, it would be impossible to tell whether they are a success or not >>
It'd be boring to not try, though. If flawed metrics like KB and bumping is what we have access to, then it's with those metrics we make do.

<< Oh sure, it can happen. But it won't be Gevlon. >>
:D:D:D
This has just gotten way more interesting than i anticipated.

<< The goal was never to cripple ice, it was to raise the price so the CFC could get richer. That was a success. I got in quite late, and still made way more isk that I could have any other way. >>

Ah, i now realise i was reading the announcement for last year's Gallente interdiction, which had "to **** on our foes in nullsec than to cripple their pubbie pos fuelers in high/lowsec" as a stated goal.

Caldari interdiction, indeed, had no such goal.

<< We certainly don't aim to permanently change how people play. >>
Aye, i noticed that :D
This makes you guys the perfect antagonists for Gevlon narrative :)

Lucas Kell said...

:D Interesting indeed.
Flawed metrics are fine to have fun with, but discerning a result from them without someone from some side pointing out the obvious holes is always going to be impossible, especially when your aim to to ridicule another group by them.
Metrics aside, I am quite interested to see if there is a growth in Gevlon's corp. So far it's member count is 3, but all 3 are Gevlon's alts. If anyone is working towards it, I'd be interested in seeing how well you are progressing towards your 3b goal.

antronics said...

"TNO theoretically doesn't gank badly fit, but active and responsive miners who paid their 10M. However an agent can find some excuse to gank him anyway."

If you would have been even the littlest bit active in the MinerBumping channel, you would know that permit holders are not ganked.

And does this statement you just made imply that if you come across a tanked and active miner you will not attempt to gank him?

"New Order Logistics have 72 members. Yet its kills are xxxbillion.

I can't see how can you call this success."

-That is for the TNOL corp. Not every Agent is in the corp. And not every Agent in the corp actively ganks, or ganks as much as others.

-TNO has raised 115b in donated ISK.
-It is the content source for the MinerBumping blog.
-The Alexa rank for www.minerbumping.com is 1,204,730.
-The Alexa rank for greedygoblin.blogspot.com/ is 2,098,141. Now there's a metric. Comparatively, your blog is a downright failure to James 315's blog.

"While I can dual-box kill a tanked retriever, I won't because it's stupid. I'm using 20M worth of ships + my time to kill a 35M worth of ship. I'm better off killing my own insured alt."

Sounds reasonable. But why is this sound logic for you, but not sound logic for MinLuv and your Procurer?

See the difference?

Anonymous said...

The point of the New Order is to create a set of ridiculous (and humiliating) hoops for miners to jump through and then gank them anyways (which consistently results in hilarity).

The New Order is preying on carebears' natural tendency to be HUGE sticklers for rules - the idea that you could write up a huge list of rules and lecture them on these rules restlessly without ANY intention of actually respecting these rules is virtually unthinkable to them.

The New Order is directly comparable to Erotica 1's "legit" ISK doubling service in this regard.
Erotica 1 has an elaborate list of rules and if you follow these rules she promises you won't get scammed. She sticks to her own rules often (I actually sent her ISK once and received double back) but far from always. And whenever she breaks her own rules she claims that her victim did overlook some aspect of the rules (while refusing to elaborate which aspect). In combination with the testimonies of those who got lucky (like myself) this leads to hilarious C&P threads where carebears come up with the most crazy interpretations of her rules because the idea that you could set up a set of rules and then stick to it AT WILL - neither respecting the rules in all cases nor scamming in every single case (or with a clear pattern) - is completely alien to them.

The New Order does the same and thrives off the outrage and confusion of miners who followed New Order rules - only to get ganked anyways and then to receive some justification by James 315 (which is obvious ridiculous bullshit in everyone's eyes - except for theirs, because they have bought into his "rules" too much already to see the hilarity).
These people can argue passionately for hours about how the new demands imposed by James 315 (as justification of their gank) are completely unreasonable and how he owes them restitution because they followed all the rules to the letter without ever seeing the bigger picture.

Anonymous said...

Follow-up to my post on New Order/Erotica 1 modus operandi:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=274543

perfect example.

Michael LeBlanc said...

Once again Gevlon your commets contradict your original post. First you say you can't gank a properly fit ship, then you turn around and say you can but wouldn't.

While I accept that you, Gevlon would abide by that, it negates your point that TNO can operate outside their stated purpose while WGBWC can't.

Also by your own statement a week is plenty of time to get 3B in ganks for anyone that already has skills. So at the very least you've been pretty unsuccessful at drawing established gankers to your corp. A new char could also have been doing about a week of T1 ganking already as well. Of course it's too early to tell long term success, but it's definitely not a very good start

Gevlon said...

@Michael: everything can be ganked if you throw enough ISK on it. But people don't have ISK.

So if you can't be ganked economically, you can't be ganked.

Yes, I could throw 10-boxed tornadoes on anything, because I can afford it. But it would be dumb, so I don't. Also, it would prove nothing but me being too rich for my brain.

Michael LeBlanc said...

And TNO ganking active players with permits proves nothing either, but you claim that somehow you're fundamentally different.

And to quote you, if people don't have ISK, they should stop being poor. A single alt in FW can cover the cost of 8 T2 catalysts ganking at a time. Ganking is not a lucrative ISK making activity (yes you can make ISK doing it, but it won't be as much as many other activities). It's a lucrative KB activity, but presumably you have another source of income.

Anonymous said...

"Gank resistant" and "ungankable"

ONLY if you do the math and compare ISK invest to kill ISK. This metagame will not make sense to any newb and dumb players.

Alot will think that they where griefed. Real grief. just because you where there not because you where a lucrative killmail. That's what the "eve gankers" will say to distract from the fact that they where just lucrative killmails that can't tank their ISK-value enough for CONCORD to show up.

This is not griefing. There is no griefing in EVE. it's metagame play called falseley "gank" to further distract clueless people.

We all probably heared of the "thou shall not dual tank!" rule ... this doesn't make sense whithin this meta until someone explains this.


James was not about kill-AFK. if you really want to be safe AFK you are only safe docked up in station. period. whatever you will fly out of staion can be killed no matter what. that's if someone wants AFK no matter the invest dead and podded. but they don't! They also distract from the metagame!


even you don't distinguis about real griefers and the "gank" meta that is at play here. you try to point to it but fall flat.

http://greedygoblin.blogspot.de/p/we-gank-because-we-care.html
"What do we do? We gank. We gank miners, missioners, haulers, autopilot-travellers. We do so because they are easy to gank. After we gank we inform them and the bystanders that they were easy targets and lead them to resources that teach them how to choose ships and how to fit them."

please ... don't distract. don't troll. you will not make any difference.

they don't understand "easy" ... and it's the wrong word to point to the whole concept of that meta that is at play here.

Ephemeron said...

"The New Order has risen against AFK mining. We can agree that gaining wealth in a game without actually playing it is practically cheating."

And yet your fabled "glyph industry" in WoW was built on being mostly AFK. All of your gold/hour calculations were specifically based on the assumption that the player will be AFK during milling, crafting, scanning, relisting and mail retrieval and only took active time into account.