Sat Mar 7 08:02:34 2009

At 4 o'clock AM, Day of Deception, 30th of the Month of the Winter Wolf
on the Theran calendar Ekavlu perished, never to return.

I mean stop being a jackass on the forums.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

If someone is in my group, and they can harm my foe.
and they don't aid in pk, but are their when I get the kill.

Does it count in the gank code?

Righto

>If someone is in my group, and they can harm my foe.
>and they don't aid in pk, but are their when I get the kill.
>
>Does it count in the gank code?

If they never struck your victim, no it doesn't show up in the gank code. Like I said, the % next to each name is the amount of damage done by that person to the victim. There are rare cases where someone will show up with 0% but those come from things like casting faerie fire on the victim, but never actually striking them.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

I feel like a horses arse.

It looks to me like you were probably involved in a lot of "opportunity kills" early on, most likely done going to and from ranking spots. Or, you didn't have a group and you just went out with a buddy to go kill some people (that's all valid, but does fall in the ganging category still).


But, on the good side it looked like you were starting to trend towards solo killing once you hit your sweet spot. I imagine there would have been more of that for a while, but you deleted and therefore we'll all never know.

I do like Krilcov and many of his incarnations I cannot actually agree with the 'opportunity kills' being early on. Reason being that I was with Tzorn in the FoN when he and his evil friends came looking for PK.
Feb 24, 2009|Lv 25|Forest of NoWhere|Tzorn vs 2: Adeglicfh (26%), Ekavlu (73%, KB)

Flimbert was with them and I could harm all three but they summoned/slept/spelled up then ganged Tzorn and I crept up to them and later ambushed Ekavlu and he fled/teleported or recalled, which I can understand given that he was down to writhing in one hit. Adeglich and Flimbert made a little show of it before Flimbert went and the necro went invisible.

They came as a group to a known goodie ranking area to look to PK so nothing opportunistic about it.

SseanN is just wrong in this instance and got a taste, at hero, of what he dished out in the mid-twenties.

-----Abernyte

asfsaf

nt

Is if you could make it so that getting healing from another pc counts them as being "in your group" for the purposes of a gank-o-meter. Similarly if another member of your cabal spells you up.

Would stop people who have a pocket healer looking like solo killers.

nt

Right.

No one has ever been multi-killed by an Imperial Gank Squad.

At least there is a valid role reason for Fort to Gank a D-elf AP.

It sucks, but Pot, meet Kettle.

nt

n/t

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

asdf

.

nt

Where do you get your info, sorry I am confused.

n/t

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Wins:
http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=31&topic_id=24056&mesg_id=24065&page=

Losses:
http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=31&topic_id=24056&mesg_id=24064&page=

He could be referring to "attempted" PKs. Like maybe he was involved in 44 solo PK encounters and 6 non-solo. Of the 44 solo he got 8 kills, while of the 6 non-solo he got 4 kills. So while only 66% of his kills were solo, 88% of his "PK encounters" were solo.

Or he's just on crack.

PK Gank-O-Meter
Total PK Wins 12
Total PK Assists 4

12-4=8. From this he likely deducted that he had 8 solo kills and 4 gank kills, even though in fact it means that he hit a killing blow 12 times and participated but didn't hit the killing blow 4 times.

I slept my foes, and Had my allies watch. Ok?
thanks for the charges.

Feb 22, 2009|Lv 13|Eaststride Road|Ebadonna vs 2: Daurthur (69%,KB), Ekavlu (30%)
Feb 23, 2009|Lv 21|Ruins of Delar-Tol|Mumulok vs 2: Flimbert (20%,KB), Ekavlu (79%)
Feb 23, 2009|Lv 22|Ruins of Delar-Tol|Rorg vs 2: Flimbert (24%), Ekavlu (75%, KB)
Feb 23, 2009|Lv 24|The Ruins of Ostalagiah|Azhir vs 2: Ekavlu (41%,KB), Adeglicfh (58%)
Feb 24, 2009|Lv 25|Forest of NoWhere|Tzorn vs 2: Adeglicfh (26%), Ekavlu (73%, KB)
Feb 25, 2009|Lv 37|Hamsah Mu'tazz|Goroel vs 3: Elzebeth (35%), Flimbert (59%, KB), Ekavlu (5%)
Feb 26, 2009|Lv 37|The Citadel of Ostalagiah|Nuruo vs 3: Ekavlu (16%), Jieloeud (25%, KB), Anckree (57%)
Mar 1, 2009 |Lv 38|The Seaport of Hamsah Mu'tazz|Zhuroth vs 2: Ekavlu (32%,KB), Phewt (67%)
Mar 3, 2009 |Lv 39|Valley of Veran|Calan vs 2: Ekavlu (86%,KB), Ahrontyn (13%)

The percentages next to the name is the amount of damage done to the victim. This is ganging, no two ways about it. Stop with the lies, and accept the fact that in this case you're wrong.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Calan attacked me and the healer who was not empowered and injured already. I didnt Initiate


--------------------------------------------

Phewt did not fight zhuroth with me. Fact
--------------------------------------------




Azhir was a felar fighting two mages with a staff, way below his rank.
That was a fair fight.

Anyways, Don't get all upity and curse at me.

so #### you for it

You say "X attacked you and the healer and was already injured, I didn't initiate." And "X was a felar fighting two people already, so it was a fair fight."

All of that might be true, but it has nothing to do with whether you were ganging or not.

It seems to me you aren't really understand what these words mean, so I'll help you.

Ganging means more than 1 vs. 1. You can say that it's "fair" to fight 3 vs. 1 or whatever number you want, but that doesn't mean it is not "ganging". You can say that only a "gang" will win certain fights, and you will be right, but that does not mean it is not "ganging". You can say that you did not initiate the fight, but if you were in a group and you were attacked by one and you stayed and fought, then it was a "gang".

The bottom line is, nothing you have said disputes the fact that you ganged a lot. What you have done is explain *why* you ganged, or how it happens, or that it wasn't "bad" or "unfair". But it does not change the fact that you did indeed "gang".

Hope that helped.

no text

You're d-elf a-p. If people nine levels lower than you didn't fight you, you wouldn't get to fight anyone.

Stop crying about the XP penalty you chose.

t

nt

with dark-elf ap's getting abused (e.g. by gaunts of conjies with 9 levels on the ap, let alone extra servitor levels).

However, you have to love the exp pen to play one of this combo. If you don't, steer clear.

Personally I do love this combo, and the exp pen feels fair.

But after reading your CF comments and let him leadership, all your posts are not valide. Sorry again.

n/t

If people nine levels lower than me didnt fight me.
I would deal with the fort ganks nine levels above me

I wasnt refering to the xp penalty.
I am refering to marano'clock. and the ultra conservative maran ganks
brought on by a lich grudge

But essentially the message was that getting to fight people 9 levels above you is part of being a D-elf AP because of the massive xp penalty.

What comes to what Zulgh pointed out, you died to ganks only twice and ganked people to death nine times. Whether part of it was defensive ganking of you had an excuse isn't going to be applicable to all of them, given the win/loss gank ratio. The ratio will still remain high enough to maintain his point even if we exclude these ganks from it. What's the point of complaining about ultra concervative Maran ganks if they fail to manage to kill you?

An ally can watch me kil someone whil resting.
and It gets considered a gank. How does a shadow help me slay someone.
If the only command they enter is rest?

n/t

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

And literally not one of them makes any sense at all.

nt