120-billion-ISK AT ship downed and reimbursed

Mischa Gau'ss Tesla 2017-09-21

Alliance tournament (AT) ships are always pricey, but generally very powerful. The AT XIV Caedes is one of those. This Blood Raider Covert Ops frigate packs a bonus to scanning, the Blood Raider nos, neut and web bonus, classical covert ops bonuses, and sports a full set of bonuses to small energy turret.

This very complete set makes it an excellent site hunter—if not the best—for those who can afford, or have won one. And that is what TehEbil1 from The Tuskers did with his, being quite efficient with 169 kill marks on his baby! That was until he lost it to Eosian Inquisitors, a new type of NPC.

It is de-Caede(s)-d

And this is yet another successful patch story: the Eosian Inquisitors, as per usual for something just added to the game, were not automatically added to the overview. Even worse: their ID was bugged, and they would not show up between brackets in the space view!

As TehEbil decloaked his hundred-billion-ISK frigate to aggress a lonely scanner, he suddenly found himself targeted and tackled by invisible enemies. His ship was soon™ destroyed, and a petition was sent to CCP.

After a short investigation, CCP decided to refund the ship due to a mistake on its side. As per usual in these cases, only the hull and modules that did not drop were given back. The ship conserved its 169 kill marks as can be seen in this picture.

TehEbil1 answers our questions

We contacted the pilot to get his side of the whole story.

INN: So you’ve been hunting for some time in this frigate now. You had about 169 kill marks, am I right?

TehEbil1: The count’s still at 169, yeah.

INN: And when entering the site, did you notice you were in one of these new locations?

TehEbil1: I noticed I was in one of the new ones. I had read the news item mentioning sleepers, so had added all the sleeper NPC’s to my overview beforehand, but nothing showed on overview or even in space, as they did not even show brackets.

INN: So you decided to aggress because you were in range or decloacked?

TehEbil1: Well, the target I was going for was a Caracal on a seemingly empty grid. I checked his launchers quickly and noticed he was using HMLs, so I just went for the chance.

INN: You said that he managed to warp out, but you had a disruptor. How did you lose your point on him and let him get away?

TehEbil1: Those sites have pretty heavy neuting, which caused me to drop a disruptor cycle, allowing him to warp. I also was pretty much in fight-or-flight mode after noticing the neuts and webs coming from seemingly nowhere.

INN: And about your reimbursement: that was very quick. Did CCP send you any more information you might share with our readers?

TehEbil1: Not really. I got the blanket “we can make an exception at this time” reply.

INN: One last question: how did you react when seeing damage, neuts and warp scrams/disrupts coming from nowhere? Did you try to fight back, or did you get instapopped?

TehEbil1: At that point started looking around a bit, noticed actual moving hulls with no brackets, and started control dragging em. I noticed that they were rats so started trying to drop them.
Unfortunately locked the battleship of the group and added it to overview once I got the lock. I didn’t have the time to drop it and tunnelvisioned pretty heavily on it while trying to take range. Must have had the frigs orbiting me, which of course were not on the overview because they are not under the same overview entity as the battleships.

INN: Stress being an enemy, as per usual. Well, thank you for your answers, any word or tip you would like me to relay to our readers?

TehEbil1: Don’t undock on patch days, or at least don’t go all-in on a new site during said patch day. Although in hindsight those issues were probably also the reason CCP did make a ruling that was favorable for me; the lack of brackets and failed overview naming was a pretty clear indication of something being wrong. I probably wouldn’t have bothered petitioning the loss had it not been a pretty clear case of the sites having some unintended issues.

INN: Yes those were indeed good indicators! Thank you again, fly safe (or dangerous, the way you prefer it!).

TehEbil1: No worries, always happy to reply to questions. Will do! o/)

I would like to thank TehEbil for answering my questions and sharing on this unusual loss and resurrection of this rare AT ship!

Let your voice be heard! Submit your own article to Imperium News here!

Would you like to join the Imperium News staff? Find out how!

Comments

  • Rhivre

    It would have been a terrible way to lose the Caedes.

    September 21, 2017 at 3:17 pm
  • Rolfski

    Did he actually get his ship back or just a refund?

    September 21, 2017 at 3:21 pm
    • Rhivre Rolfski

      he got the ship back

      September 21, 2017 at 3:31 pm
    • Mischa Gau'ss Tesla Rolfski

      As said by Rhivre: he got the ship and the fitting that did not drop back. The screencap with the kill marks and mods is from the “new” ship

      September 21, 2017 at 7:42 pm
  • Alot

    NOBODY expects the Eosian Inquisition! Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice… Oh damn, I forgot something :/

    September 21, 2017 at 9:05 pm
  • Potter

    Why do we need to manually add new ships to the overview in the first place? What sort of shitty software runs our ships? I mean it’s cool we now have a 40mb hard drive for the probe launcher that keeps sites in memory when you dock, but this is kind of ridiculous.

    September 22, 2017 at 4:16 am