Gankers Strike!

Disaster strikes the incursion communities with a flurry of ganks of faction battleships!

https://zkillboard.com/kill/42295536/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42294111/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42292218/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42268811/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42267633/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42266748/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42265924/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/42265290/

The incursion communities are reeling in shock of the nearly 26b isk combined loss. Gankers continue to patrol the area's 0.5 and 0.6 systems, and travelers are advised to not autopilot and to fit a travel fit.

The communities have no official comment, other than a strong recommendation for using travel fits when passing through these 0.5 systems.

Stealth nerf to ISBoxing ganks?

CCP is now coming under fire for an alleged stealth-nerf to ISBoxer ganks with claims of the Global Criminal popup not disappearing on multiple clients despite repeated attempts to click the "OK" button.

Normally, when someone starts firing upon a ship in highsec, and he attempts to warp off, he'll receive a popup stating in short that he is unable to warp off because he's flagged as a criminal. Normally, you can click the "OK" button and attempt to warp off again. However, that is apparently not the case. Players attempting to warp pods off grid are greeted with a surprise: The window will not close. No matter how hard you click the "OK" button, it stays there, mocking your attempts to save your pod.

Now, normally a popup window is no real worry. You can click the warp button again and it will send the command to the server and check if you can. But with the Global Criminal popup, your screen is locked to that single small popup, rendering you unable to warp off even if you click the "Warp To" button again.

When an ISBoxer is attempting to warp off in his pods, it is key that the popup is dismissed as fast as possible.

Currently, we are awaiting CCP's responses to the petitions for reimbursement on the pods. We are optimistic that CCP will make the right choice and replace the implants, but it has been pointed out that CCP is between a rock and a hard place:

If they reimburse the pods, they'll acknowledge that ISBoxers can engage in PVP activities.

If they don't, they'll be confirming that they are going to ban either ISBoxer PVP in the future, or ISBoxer in all formats.

We await the response of the GMs.

If a CCP representative would like to discuss ISBoxer in EVE, please don't hesitate to message me.

EFT Warriors: The Talos

So, the time has come. You've been sitting in Jita scanning freighter after freighter that undocks, hoping to find something juicy, when it appears.

A freighter holding no less than 10 billion isk in it's cargohold in various faction modules, apparel, implants, and subsystems.

You go to your hangar, get into your Talos, but whats this? It's unfitted? You have no idea what to fit?

Well that's what I'm here to help you with! (Nah jk, everyone knows how to fit a Talos.)

[Talos, Gank]

Tracking Enhancer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II

Alumel-Wired Sensor Augmentation, Scan Resolution Script
Alumel-Wired Sensor Augmentation, Scan Resolution Script
'Orion' Tracking CPU I
Peripheral Weapon Navigation Diameter

Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L

[Empty Rig slot]
[Empty Rig slot]
[Empty Rig slot]


Hammerhead II x2
Hobgoblin II x1

1410 DPS cold, 1609 overheated.
EHP: It's gonna get GCC'd. There is no tank.

Price with T2 guns: 129m isk.
Price with M4 guns: 108m isk. @ 1164 DPS cold, 1326 hot.

Players can expect to use 5-8 per gank, depending on skills, CONCORD antics, bulkheads vs cargos, and any number of things. I won't go into detail on how to mess with CONCORD, as James 315's website goes into great detail on how to do that.

Players can swap painters for other modules that might help applied DPS, like webs, in the set so you don't wind up with wasted target painters.

Good luck, and happy hunting!

EFT Warriors: Fleet BlapCane

Today, we shall look at a fleet setup for the Hurricane. This fit was theorycrafted by a multiboxer for lowsec gatecamp disruption. It focuses on alpha using a rack of 720mm Howitzers to achieve it's goal of killing the gatecampers before they have a chance to get reps or jump through.

[Hurricane, Hurricane - DNA Imported]

Damage Control II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II

Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Small 'Vehemence' Shockwave Charge
720mm Howitzer Artillery II, Quake M
720mm Howitzer Artillery II, Quake M
720mm Howitzer Artillery II, Quake M
720mm Howitzer Artillery II, Quake M
720mm Howitzer Artillery II, Quake M
720mm Howitzer Artillery II, Quake M

Medium Ancillary Current Router II
Medium Core Defense Field Extender II
Medium Core Defense Field Extender II


Hobgoblin II x5
Hammerhead II x3

Requires 1% CPU implant, or remove the smartbomb.

EHP: 70.7k
DPS: 482 (Quake + Hammers)
Volley: 3397

Pro's:
Relatively cheap at 63m ISK.
Lots of alpha while keeping tank.
Natural recharge bonus gives 119 hp/s shield recharge with the double LSE.

Con's:
Requires someone else to bring tackle.
No webs, so good luck hitting that Dramiel orbiting at 5km/s.
No MWD/AB.
Severe vulnerability to bombs if you go to nullsec (335 sig)
Minmatar (just kidding)

Verdict:
It's an interesting fit that begs for a MWD at the very least. It might be a good starting ship for those looking for practice controlling a fleet and target picking, but after that, it should be shelved. The shield buffer gives you some breathing room in case stuff goes south, but after that 50k ehp is gone, the rest will go by very fast.

CSM 17-19 September 2014 Minutes and Multiboxing

This post will be about the ISBoxer discussion during the September CSM minutes, what was said, what was redacted, and what has been happening in EVE.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer, nor am I CSM. I am a multiboxer, and have used ISBoxer to gank multiple people in the past, however, I wouldn't mind if CCP drew the line in ISBoxer for PVP because at least a line will be made visible to the player instead of the current murky mist that envelops the issue.

We will start off by looking at this killmail of Skyrider Deathknight's Vindicator gank, and it's subsequent replacement of his Vindicator and of the chat logs where he claimed CCP does not endorse PVP using ISBoxer. Now, we cannot comment on CCP's ISBoxer PVP policy, mainly since there seems to be no policy. There are hundreds of instances documented by people who used ISBoxer or another program to orchestrate or participate in a gank that was reimbursed by a GM simply because there were two accounts being controlled by ISBoxer. Indeed, there seems to be a plethora of people who have spoken up about the issue. I'm not here to debate whether or not it should be allowed 100%, allowed for PVE activities, or banned outright. I'm of the opinion that it should be allowed 100% but I would be willing to settle for PVE activities only, and I have yet to see a decent argument why it should be banned 100% outside of "muh lossmail" or "it's killing EVE". I will leave that to the forum warriors of General Discussion to battle it out. I merely will present my opinion.


We next move to this killmail. The Mittani wrote a nice article summarizing what happened, so I won't cover that. What I will cover is the Mordus Angels bomber boxer Replicator posting in alliance chat things such as "...too bad it'll get reimbursed..." and "...[GMs] have a thing against ISBoxer pvp..." and the worrying response by CCP Bugartist in response to Xander's question on the CSM. First, let's look at the basics of why multiboxing PVP should not be banned or losses reimbursable:

• You're paying for another account, much like a wormhole resident would for a scout, or a Marmite would for a backup logi alt, or a nullsec super/titan pilot would for a holding toon. 
• You're introducing complexity into your end of the "PVP equation" (basically, as amount of toons you're multitasking between goes up, your end productivity compared to multiple humans goes down drastically).
• If you mess up, your risk is much greater than single pilots in a fleet.
• If one gets jammed, damped, or destroyed, you will most likely lose his ship and pod due to focus and attempting to either win the battle or escape. 
• Any loss incurred by an ISBox fleet will have had, 9 times out of 10, been killed by a fleet of actual people behind the keyboard. 

Arguments against it range from the inane ("he's just gonna bring a falcon") to the semi-reasonable (it turns EVE into pay-to-win!"), however the former argument can be true if you tap a buddy to fly with you, and the latter becomes illogical when you look at the character bazaar and the fact that running two accounts does not equal in any way running 10+. 

I have personally invited CCP Seagull to chat with a group of 10-12 multiboxers about the ganking issue, and she refused to reply. Take that as you will. I would've wished to have had her reply and decline than to continue to ignore her userbase.

CCP Falcon's post claiming that the policy hasn't changed must be taken with a titan-sized grain of salt, especially when we look back to the Atlanta scandal, the current "fiasco" regarding wormholes (can read about that here and here), the covert ops cloak change that has since been reversed after, according to some including a CSM, the multiboxing bomber mains posted in the thread to tell CCP why they were wrong, as well as the supposed war against highsec (I personally think that's a load of bull, but I'm including it here because people are starting to not trust CCP).

It was either CCP Fozzie of CCP Falcon who made a very flimsy argument about why you shouldn't draw a line in the sand which was very easily dealt with by James 315 of CODE. Generally, if you aren't the Gestapo or North Korea, having a line in the sand and saying "you can't cross this line" that is visible to all helps the community because it provides very clear options for the pilot. CCP has gone the route of the invisible shifting line which will harm the community no matter what part you're from, as seen by the banwave involving Fighter Jets (no I forget his full name). 

CCP needs to either come out and tell the multiboxing community what the reimbursement policy regarding ISBoxer and other boxing software, or they will lose subscribers. Numbers are vague on ISBoxer numbers, but CCP will lose human subscribers as well, since the current "meta" for petitioning losses due to ganks is "claim you were ganked by an ISBoxer" and you will get reimbursed.