26 January YC117 / Somewhere in High-Sec

26-01-2015-01-13-20-0a6f
Does something seem fishy about this killmail?

In the case of this particular mail from 29 December 2014, you’d be right in thinking one or two things about it don’t quite add up. Ignoring for a moment the influx of comments, it appears that a pilot named “Globby” was successful in taking a Bowhead Freighter down in Highsec without being at war.

The unusual part of this killmail is that according to what we know of CONCORD’s behaviour when it comes to aggression in high security space, there is no way that a Catalyst should be able to stay alive long enough to do 66,961 worth of damage to a Bowhead before being destroyed. Generally CONCORD will jam and destroy an aggressing ship before any further damage can be done, with a response time proportionate to the security level of the system (0.5 to 1.0).

For a long time Catalysts have been used for ganking in highsec, often with griefers pulling together large numbers in order to perform the task. In most cases of a freighter gank, it’s not unusual to see many Catalysts on the kill, valued for the high amount of damage they can output in a short amount of time, their expandability and ability to move around systems and into position.

10 days ago, Reddit user FJGS reported his interpretation of how the mechanic works and speculated that as a result, a “ban wave” had been initiated by CCP. We have taken the decision not to include a rundown of how this exploit is performed within this article to prevent any accidental violations of the EULA by our staff or our readers should they decide to attempt this on their own.

One thing is certain, it is a questionable use of in-game mechanics; a look at the losses for this particular pilot may give credence to speculations about how this exploit is being performed.

FJGS later went on to surmise that he had confirmed least one player, who was to remain anonymous, had been banned across multiple accounts. At this time, the accuracy of this claim can not be verified but if true, would mean that CCP is actively taking action against players for doing this despite no official announcement on the matter. This is unlike previous cases such as the infamous Webbing exploit.

sad bowhead

So what does this mean for Freighter pilots? Should they be more vigilant? Isn’t high security space already dangerous enough with griefers and gankers without having yet another mechanic to worry about?

Globby was back yesterday performing what appears to be the same trick, leaving us to speculate as to whether this pilot was indeed banned at all for making use of this mechanic. Reddit user hheq took the time to make a post about his interpretation of the chronology of events and what he believes has happened.

26-01-2015-01-45-14-0066
More like NO-HEAD (AMIRITE?). I’m not even sorry for that pun.

My recommendation? Don’t do it. No one gets into high-sec ganking to make friends but this certainly seems the capacity to get you more than an angry eve-mail. Should CCP be more vigilant in their identification of mechanical misuse? Is this indeed misuse of the mechanics? And if so, do they need changing?

-Phantra

  • CFC Member

    Not an exploit till CCP openingly calls it such. It’s a dirty as hell tactic, but its not an exploit (yet)

    • Hightower

      a fault or exploit will always be what it is. Uneccesary if CCP announces it in before. The rule of common sense applies. Whenever something does not work as intended and its clearly abused to harm others, its an exploit.

      • Bantor

        Then leaving a tower offline in order to assign fighters and then raising the shields when a red comes in is also clearly an exploit.

      • Isn’t part of the joy of playing in a sandbox to use thinks for not their intended purpose?

      • you what

        Like mining. You mine to get resources which you use to build ships which you use to harm others. So mining is an exploit.

        Also, logging in. I log in to play eve so I can kill people. EXPLOIT !!!!!

  • CommonSense101

    It’s an exploit.

  • Deltaguy

    Well if goons are allowed to keep on isbox bombing then i dont see why this should be banned.

    • CFC Member

      And then that particular Test Pilot that roams with 3 other alts in Delkein needs to be banned too for isboxing those ceptors

      • Deltaguy

        fully agree. But we all know ccp wont lift a finger if it harms someone from cfc.

        • you are my favorite bitter person.

    • You need to be more specific since isboxer is not banned. account broadcasting is banned.

  • RedBull

    should this be legal, i instantly quit eve for ever point.

    • xxxxx

      bye.

    • Bantor

      Can I have your stuff?

  • Oddsodz

    This should not be bannable. But I do feel that yet again this highlights the issue of “Bumping” and not having any way to get away from it. With the exception of supers class ships, There is a counter for every tactic and or game mechanic. There is no counter to bumping. If a Machariel bump fit wants to bump your freighter. There is not one thing you can do as a pilot to stop it. If a players wishes too. He can bump you all 23 hours long till down time and you can not get away. There is a easy fix for this. Give freighter/Orca/Bowhead a limited mid slot for a micro jump drive. Hard to bump a ship if it 100KM away. Trade off is as them that know what happens when you activate a Micro jump drive is that you SIG is ballooned by I think 500%. And we all know what that means right?

    • Thatguy

      problem with that idea is, they can wait for you to activate it and then unleash a lot of dps. Other problem is, most ships can go 100km quicker than a large ship aligns and gets to warp.

      • Oddsodz

        Now you see, you have not looked at how this happens. Let me try to type up a most case scenario. You in your freighter/Orca/Bowhead are travaling around in hi-sec. You have your alt scouting (A webbing alt is a good thing too but with the up coming changes to AWOXing that my prove a bit of a problem) a jump gate ahead. Scout jumps in to system. Reports no bump type ships on the gate (Stabbers Macs Vigilants I am sure there is more) or any ships at all. You jump the gate with your freighter and suddenly a Mac de-cloaks and burns at you and bumps you as well as noob ship that also lands or de-cloaks and aggress you to make sure you can not just log off. Now you are fucked. Because now the gankers have all the time in to world to warp in and get set up with gank catalysts at 0 on your helpless freighter/Orca/Bowhead. You can not get away. Now that is what happens most of the time in 0.5 pipe systems. The gankes just don’t on the gates waiting for you to jump in with your scout so you can see them and run away,. They hide and wait until they can get a good target and bump it. “Once bumped, Forever Stumped”

        • Thatguy

          Thanks for the insight. But again i’m saying if you MDJ in a random direction – presumibly away from your intended destination, a MWD Mach or other ship is pretty likely to be able to catch up before you can turn all the way around and get to speed.
          Wonder if CCP can make a “partial” awox-ok setting that allows for webbing and other less harmful effects.

          • Oddsodz

            You have not played much with an MJD have you. Yes a MWDing bump fit Mac can get to you fast. But then a MJD does not cut your speed when it does the jump or changes your alignment. The moment you press the button, That is the direction your ship will go. Even if the Bump mac bumps you 180 degrees 2 seconds later, you will still jump 100KM in the direction that you was pointing at when your pressed the button. Ok let me put it this way. Your ships pointing north. You press the MJD and then 1 second latter the bumping ship bumps you so that your ship is pointing south. It don’t matter, You will in 3 to 5 seconds still MJD 100KM north. Now the Bumping ship has to turn around and gain speed and catch you. Where as you only have to warp. And your alignment time is not going to change. In fact as you have had some speed from the bump ship. You may even get into warp faster.

          • Thatguy

            I haven’t played eve for a long time, was under the impression MJD slows/stops you for some reason. Well played!

        • Leicester

          “A webbing alt is a good thing too but with the up coming changes to AWOXing that my prove a bit of a problem”

          Duels. No problem at all.

    • Blobfight

      I heared that there are a lot of counters for super class ships:

      1. More supers
      2. Suicide Dreads
      3. Simply blob like CFC kkthxbye 🙂

    • Ming Tso

      What if you, I don’t know, get someone in a Machariel and counter-bump you back into alignment?

  • podgankers

    Just make concord pod gankers and its all good!

    • guest

      how would that help?

      • podgankers

        Obviously because the gankers pod would be in a station somewhere!
        No time to change ship maybe?
        Or another option: you get concorded, you cant board a ship in the time you are GCC.

        • Ming Tso

          -In High Security Space.
          Lowseccers have valid reasons for wanting to board ships while GCC.

        • santaclown

          maybe… can’t board ship or dock while GCC.

          Anyway… High-Sec Drama! LOL!

  • Kill -10 instantly

    when a -10 jumps into high sec make concord insta kill his ship and pod him.
    if you want to gang someone in empire buy some tags, farm some rats and then lets say when you have -7.0 you can go out there an do your things.

    • Dichzor

      ive been saying the same thing for years! those with ticker -10 should absolutely explode on entering highsec. What a marvellous idea. Oh you meant security status -10…. That’s just stupid.

      • Kill -10 instantly

        And why you think this is stupid? Having someone who chooses to go -10 (he didn’t accidentally got that security status) he should live with some restrictions. let them use only PODs in high sec. They can never board a ship. they choose to be criminals, they have ways to make that sec status positive but CCP is giving them a free pass into high sec with something fast.

        • pubbie-pubbie

          you think that living in highsec is a choice, that should be rewarded. That is not how i see it. Highsec is the most dangerous part of eve, cos its so unpredictable. You are under delusion that it is safe and want that delusion to continue.. that’s why your premise is stupid, stupid.

        • l0rd carlos

          Because you not only punish gankers, you also punish honable lowsec pilots who just want to quickly travle through highsec with an interceptor.

          A mechanic that would make it easier for players to be the police of highsec would be ideal. Less NPC, more player desicions. Same goes for drug trafficking.

          • Empire sucks

            It’s the reason they brought in the tag system – simple as this, You go -10 you either buy the tags to re-enter high sec or you get insta popped by concord it’s that simple. Why should the person who gets ganked always be the one to suffer and not the ganker.

          • l0rd carlos

            Bullshit, I do think that the ganker should suffer. But I don’t think the proposed idea is good gameplay. Gankers who make money will buy tags, poor lowsec pvplers will suffer.

            Like I said, I rather want a system with as little NPC influence as possible.

  • gg

    This (hyperdunking) is definitely not a bannable offense. It does not exploit or circumvent the ‘don’t escape CONCORD’ rule (as someone erroniously mentioned on reddit) because in each case he gets destroyed in a ship. Pulling CONCORD away to a different planet or celestial in a noobship has never been against the EULA, it is standard ganking practice. This tactic is just an extension of that, which allows a single or two man team (ganker pilot+bumper) to take down targets. If anything it requires much more preparation and effort then normal ganking because you have to prepare everything in advance (safespots, ships etc) and a single error will probably result in a fail.

    As to the banned player, do we have confirmation from CCP that he was banned? If he was indeed banned (and not just gone away from the game for a while) I would not be surprised if the initial ban was reversed because, as I mentioned above, this is not an exploit, at least not according to the current interpretation of the EULA by CCP.

    • Bytestorm

      According to killboard he is still active and still “hyperdunking”:
      https://zkillboard.com/character/878768739/

    • Grarrrg

      Actually, it is.

      The CONCORD pulling is not the issue. He’s leaving grid, coming back and attacking the same target again while his GCC is still in force, which has been an exploit for nearly three years now. -> http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/exploit-notification-boomerang-avoiding-concord-in-high-security-space.-updated/

      • Ming Tso

        What you are attempting to lawyer is the use of “returning to grid and attacking the same target again (while in the same ship)” into “returning to grid and attacking the same target again (while GCCed.)”

        The rule you reference is in context to Boomeranging, which was declared an exploit, and fixed with the rule about not being able to warp away in a ship you GCCed with.

        Since GCCed pods ARE allowed to warp, and since pulling CONCORD IS legal, and boarding ships while GCCed IS legal, (but will trigger a concord response,) he is not warping with a GCCed ship, and he is losing every ship he gets into while GCCed.

        If you can find a way to escape the bumping (perhaps by flying a ship smaller than a freighter) you can find a way out of this situation.

      • gg

        I see what you did there.

        You must be that guy that keeps spamming this link on reddit as well.

        The notification that you linked refers to ‘boomeranging’ which was a practice where one would aggress while in a ship and then warp away before CONCORD kills you to another gank, or come back to finish the previous one, thus avoiding CONCORD aggression. Even the title of the notice says so: “Boomerang” – avoiding CONCORD in high security space.”

        You’re basically trying to rule-lawyer that the ‘returning back’ part is a self standing proclamation and not part of a sentence that says that you are not allowed to do that in a ship while avoiding CONCORD aggression. You are basically pulling a few words out of context to fit your goal.

        All the steps in this tactic are legit:

        1. Shooting someone until CONCORD arrives and kills your ship
        2. Warping away in your pod (CONCORD does not attack pods)
        3. Boarding a new ship (shuttle) with GCC and pulling CONCORD
        4. Warping away in your pod after having pulled CONCORD (CONCORD does not attack pods)
        5. Boarding a new gank ship (catalyst in this case) and shooting the target again until CONCORD arrives and kills your ship
        6. Rinse and repeat

        So yeah, no you are not correct.

  • Danny S

    ganking is just more profitable like this as you don’t need to split the loot with 20 people you now only need to split it by 2 or 3. We all know the more profitably way has prescience.

  • Jaime Gomes

    The old slingshot.

  • McCool

    How not to get hyperdunked: A quick guide.

    Don’t autopilot

    • l0rd carlos

      You still can be bumped, no?

      • Guest

        yes, but you can’t hyperdunk an active target

        • l0rd carlos

          Why not? Serous question as I don’t know about high sec shenanigans.

        • 2 month old player

          why not? what can they do if they don’t have anyone else to help them?

          you cannot evade the ganker when continuously bumped. without hiring escort or logis or both i dont imagine there is a way to escape this tactic

          • unary

            I have been saying this for many years. I wish everybody in High sec would just spend 3 months in Null. See how the big alliances do things when it comes to logistics. No I am not talking about jump freighters. Freighters get`s escorted by a small/medium/large fleet because the freighter pilot/alliance knows it only take one neutral to mess up your day. Guys in High sec knows that they are targets for Gankers but still they autopilot/fly without support. It is easy… get in fleet!!! The more Catalysts it takes to bring down a target the less attractive the target becomes… especially if the target can shoot back. Just a thought. 🙂

          • bla i lost a 8b freighter bla

            but thats an interesting point. should high security space really need escorts? if yea, why having hig security space? why distinguishing between different security levels?

          • w-spacer

            I live in w-space and I find it super scary to fly my freighter(or anything blingy for that matter) through highsec. In w-space our fleet can just “clear the way” – that doesn’t work in highsec. So far we never lost one in w-space but several (even empty ones) in highsec.

          • porky75 .

            If a freighter had 3 or 4 logi, very few would die in high sec. That requires people not playing alone and doing things in groups – as intended by game designers.

            Clearly thousands of players who live in high-sec don’t like playing in groups and would rather do things alone. The fundamental question here is a little deeper; it is: Does CCP appease a very large part of its’ customer base and allow for safer individual play or keep to the current game-style?

            From what I see there are two contrasting perspectives – a financial one (people come and leave in droves because of the lack of individual play and safety in high-sec) Vrs. the current “all adult assholes welcome” that appeals to so many existing customers. For a few years, CCP has straddled the fence on this question and chosen to never go over the fence.

            I think the numbers (by that I mean $$$$) will do the talking in the end and sooner then later you will see all weapons disabled in high against other players. Whatever keeps more accounts going – that will win the day.

    • [-LEG.] Archeras Umangiar

      Or how about dont be poor and fly a JF with an exit cyno?

    • Also don’t anti-tank

      • really now

        Given one of the Bowheads that recently fell to this was fully tanked… what’s your point?

        • I saw that, but just because one was killed does not mean you should just give up and anti-tank your ship/ make it easier to be killed.

  • Nicky Millergill

    “Isn’t high security space already dangerous enough with griefers and gankers without having yet another mechanic to worry about” Really? You’re complaining like a child over the fact that catalyst dunking in high security space is a thing? I don’t know what to tell you buddy High Sec space is about as safe as it gets, would you like high security to be a no kill zone?

    • Phantra

      I’m asking the question, not complaining. I can’t even enter highsec.

      • Nicky Millergill

        seemed like a rhetorical question not a real question your article has a rhetorical tone.

  • So what i gathered is reddit is not a reliable source of information.

  • Saltpastillen

    It seems pointless to discuss whether or not this is an actual exploit. This is something CCP decides.

    What seems worth discussing, is if this tactic is against the whole idea of the current ruleset.

    Rules & regulations in a game are there to force a certain type of gameplay, or to prevent it. So we have to look at the above tactic in that light. Is this something that is working as intended or not?

    • Roy

      CCP doesn’t decide if it’s an exploit or not and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that this is one. CCP only decides if they’re going to punish it or not.

      If it wasn’t an exploit, we could do away with 15 minutes criminal timers alltogether. Welcome to Gankers Online in that case – even more so than it is already.

      • Saltpastillen

        Excuse my obvious ignorance on this part, but if CCP doesn’t decide what is an exploit and what is not, then who does?

  • 200 man goon fleet

    I love how this article is reporting on month old events with information that has been out of date for a week. The player in question was already unbanned and has been back at hyperganking since returning to the game. Clearly CCP has already ruled this to not be an exploit. Great reporting as ever from EN24.

    • Guest

      And when EN24 (frequently) beats TMC to a news article (by days) then the coolaid says that EN24 is to quick to publish, and good journalists let a story finish unfolding before they publish.

      • Daniel Plain

        i have literally never ever heard this argument. anywhere. ever.

  • cheErioZzz

    Who wrote that code ?

  • cheErioZzz

    Who wrote that code ?

  • Eldwinn

    So your documentation about this exploit is reddit. Which really is not documentation. Where is the official documentation or did I overlook it?

    • DarkonFullPower

      Official documentation of a game exploit is a breach of Eve Online’s EULA, and would get their accounts banned. They’re not going to risk it.

      • Eldwinn

        I see no exploit. This is inside the game mechanics and has been so for many years.

  • Candyman

    Sooooooo… your idea of an article is to look like you’re talking about something but you also state that you really shouldn’t talk about, or elaborate on, the parts that would make this worth talking about in the first place. FFS, boy. Don’t quit that day-job flipping burgers.

  • qwero

    So basically the player used cheap ships to lure concord away from the victim? This tactic is used for years. IF this is an exploit then hundreds or even thousands of players need to be banned.

  • Ro Black

    Globby didn’t use an “exploit”. He had a friend in-system in an orca with 7 catalysts and dropped them all nearby so globby was able to gank, die, jump in cats, repeat. That simple.

    Calling teamwork and creative thinking an “exploit” is, plain and simple, insulting to legitimate pvpers like globby (who happens to be well known enough even before this that the author not knowing of him means their noob is showing) and pretty damn stupid.

    So cut it out.

  • Darkblad

    Lock all empty catalysts on grid, so only the previous “owner” can enter it. And as it’s not possible to board a ship of a pilot currently having a criminal timer, “Globby” can’t launch them himself.

    Problem solved … well, if your ship is capable of targeting anything.

  • hmm

    The fact is ccp should fix their shit. He used a mechanic that the game allowed not his fault. quite clever actually. But ccp should fix it that people also get podded especially when they have changed no clone requirement

  • Eldwinn

    Official statement came in. Link is https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=400977&find=unread . So tl;dr eve news gets it wrong again.