These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

GMs - Please weigh in on the boomerang maneuver. Exploit (y/n)?

First post
Author
Subdolus Venator
State War Academy
Caldari State
#221 - 2012-03-30 18:55:22 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
I also think this is a bandaid that could have been better solved with a patch to adapt Concord to the tactic rather than a rule banning it.
Hear hear!
Simply changing the GCC in hi-sec to 'lasts until the criminal is hunted down and grease-spotted' should've been fine. And it would likely have produced some truly epic hot-pursuits - the kind which get written-up in blogs and industry news. Publicity-generating events, yanno?

I think CCP has missed a bet here.

EVE is EVE - Feaces will eventuate.

Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#222 - 2012-03-30 19:15:09 UTC
Subdolus Venator wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
I also think this is a bandaid that could have been better solved with a patch to adapt Concord to the tactic rather than a rule banning it.
Hear hear!
Simply changing the GCC in hi-sec to 'lasts until the criminal is hunted down and grease-spotted' should've been fine. And it would likely have produced some truly epic hot-pursuits - the kind which get written-up in blogs and industry news. Publicity-generating events, yanno?

I think CCP has missed a bet here.


Didn't they say thus would be patched out? Sorry it doesn't make good media entertainment. Still,it's been deemed an exploit, there is a patch coming that will prevent this, and the mean time, if done it can be petitioned.

Also, the idea that you want a rush patch related to concord worries me. Ccp decent at coding and qa testing, but are far from perfect. Any rushed patch may work... But could also cause concord to attack anyone for any act of aggression or worse... Kill your .ini file.

In otherwords, give ccp time to do the patch right so there's less chance of problems.
Subdolus Venator
State War Academy
Caldari State
#223 - 2012-03-30 19:21:23 UTC
Fine. Roll it with Inferno - Which isn't all that far down the road.

As to why is doesn't make good entertainment - that's a failure of marketting imagination. CCP rolls out plenty of breathless sexy adverts - why not make more of 'em based on actual fights? Spam 'em in front of other vids in YouTube, like every other swinging **** does these days. Put some longer ones in theaters in front of the movies. Hell, if there can be WOW adverts on TV, why not EVE, too? A little (suitably sexed-up) live drama ought to sell fairly well.

EVE is EVE - Feaces will eventuate.

Pamela Podpopper
Doomheim
#224 - 2012-03-30 19:23:30 UTC
Subdolus Venator wrote:
Fine. Roll it with Inferno - Which isn't all that far down the road.

As to why is doesn't make good entertainment - that's a failure of marketting imagination. CCP rolls out plenty of breathless sexy adverts - why not make more of 'em based on actual fights? Spam 'em in front of other vids in YouTube, like every other swinging **** does these days. Put some longer ones in theaters in front of the movies. Hell, if there can be WOW adverts on TV, why not EVE, too? A little (suitably sexed-up) live drama ought to sell fairly well.


Eve Online would make a lame trailer...
hey lookit that rifter orbit
whee look at the afterburner,
hey awesome HUD
look at the mindless zombie bears melt veldspar rocks
[end of trailer]

...the essence of excitment folks

Tarendar
Sparkle Pony Inc
#225 - 2012-03-30 19:27:19 UTC
Speaking as a dedicated carebear, one that makes regular runs from Jita to Rens in a hauler... this ruling makes me haz a sad. I approve of having to worry about hauling a few hundred million isk worth of crap halfway across the empire. I like the idea that escorting your hauler with the hundreds of millions of isk is maybe a wise idea. And if somebody comes up with a way to make freighters be not completely invulnerable.. awesome. If they can't afford to lose them, they shouldn't be flying them.
Hayaishi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#226 - 2012-03-30 19:31:42 UTC
The people here are so mad. But really, you had your chance, you had a nice new toy, but now it's time to let it all go, and go back to killing multi-billion ISK freighters the ordinary way. Which, I believe, costs a tiny fraction of the profit made.
Subdolus Venator
State War Academy
Caldari State
#227 - 2012-03-30 19:40:55 UTC
Pamela Podpopper wrote:
Subdolus Venator wrote:
Fine. Roll it with Inferno - Which isn't all that far down the road.

As to why is doesn't make good entertainment - that's a failure of marketting imagination. CCP rolls out plenty of breathless sexy adverts - why not make more of 'em based on actual fights? Spam 'em in front of other vids in YouTube, like every other swinging **** does these days. Put some longer ones in theaters in front of the movies. Hell, if there can be WOW adverts on TV, why not EVE, too? A little (suitably sexed-up) live drama ought to sell fairly well.


Eve Online would make a lame trailer...
hey lookit that rifter orbit
whee look at the afterburner,
hey awesome HUD
look at the mindless zombie bears melt veldspar rocks
[end of trailer]

...the essence of excitment folks

:: shakes head ::
Serious failure of marketing imagination.

Take something like this:
http://youtu.be/ejX0Rym0NZw

And stage it around actual fights. Get players' permission to use their likeness and names - make the connection between the game and the player explicit. They've half-way done it a couple times, only it requires in-game knowledge to make the connections. Make the connection obvious to the outsiders.

Besides - Who doesn't love a good hot-pursuit vid?

EVE is EVE - Feaces will eventuate.

lSoSol
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#228 - 2012-03-30 19:43:07 UTC  |  Edited by: lSoSol
Tarendar wrote:
Speaking as a dedicated carebear, one that makes regular runs from Jita to Rens in a hauler... this ruling makes me haz a sad. I approve of having to worry about hauling a few hundred million isk worth of crap halfway across the empire. I like the idea that escorting your hauler with the hundreds of millions of isk is maybe a wise idea. And if somebody comes up with a way to make freighters be not completely invulnerable.. awesome. If they can't afford to lose them, they shouldn't be flying them.


I too agree there needs to be some risk. I accept I may get ganked every time I undock. I accept if I haul >100m in a T1 industrial I'm an idiot.

However, it is a question of balance.

Freighters are not invulnerable. If you want to gank my 1bil freighter, fleet up a bil worth of ships.
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
#229 - 2012-03-30 20:07:33 UTC
lSoSol wrote:
Tarendar wrote:
Speaking as a dedicated carebear, one that makes regular runs from Jita to Rens in a hauler... this ruling makes me haz a sad. I approve of having to worry about hauling a few hundred million isk worth of crap halfway across the empire. I like the idea that escorting your hauler with the hundreds of millions of isk is maybe a wise idea. And if somebody comes up with a way to make freighters be not completely invulnerable.. awesome. If they can't afford to lose them, they shouldn't be flying them.


I too agree there needs to be some risk. I accept I may get ganked every time I undock. I accept if I haul >100m in a T1 industrial I'm an idiot.

However, it is a question of balance.

Freighters are not invulnerable. If you want to gank my 1bil freighter, fleet up a bil worth of ships.


nah, I'll stick to using 7 tornados.

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP

Ubiquitous Forum Alt
#230 - 2012-03-30 20:10:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Ubiquitous Forum Alt
Tarsas Phage wrote:
54a wrote:
Skippermonkey wrote:
CCP DEV #1 - "How do we encourage more PVP in nulsec and losec?"
CCP DEV #2 - "By removing it from hisec"
CCP DEV #1 - "Brilliant!"


If shooting an afk freighter with a boomerang tornado is your idea of PVP that is pretty sad tbh....


Get off the worn out "what is real pvp" high horse. I swear, it's the equivalent of of being a dull-brained knuckledragger and spouting "no u!" when trying to formulate a comeback to something said.

It does not matter where you are in Eve - your ship is vulnerable when in space. PERIOD. Boomeranging a freighter certainly takes far more piloting skill and a perfect sense of timing than autopiloting your spacecows day in and day out. I swear, Jin Fel is a bot if you ask me.


Look at the corp. Attention

Look at the ship type he mentioned. Question

Maybe he has a vested interest in this matter? Idea

But he sure as **** isn't an actual PvPer....Roll


Way to fall into his trap and overlook the true depths of his bias though. Oops

I don't log in - I don't need to. My very existence griefs people. They see my name, and they instinctively fill with rage and indignation. Deny it all you want - but if you didn't care, you wouldn't have posted, would you?

Hirokinai
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#231 - 2012-03-30 20:15:11 UTC
Well this was all fun and enlightening. If you expected this to last, that was kind of silly. I love mah pvp and blowing up hulks and freighters as much as the next guy, but this was so batently imbalanced it was heatscratching.

Yes, the inventor came up with an ingenious way of killing things with relatively low risk/reward margins. Yes it was fun for a few days. However the imbalance it creates is blatently obvious. CCP gave freighters a shitton of hp for a reason, and that was to make them extremely difficult to kill in highsec, and i'm PRETTY sure being able to solo a freighter outside of wardecs etc. is not something that is "working as intended".

It definitely would affect the overall health of the game, and start making freighters obsolete. You can only escort so many freighters, and you definitely cannot escort freighter alts in NPC corps. Alot of people are very short-sighted. They dont see beyond the "halp, i wants to be space outlaw pewpew all things make monay", but dont realize that if you took away a huge chunk of freighter industry, their pew pew is going to start being impossible to fund. CCP definitely cares more about the overall health of the game, while trying to please as many as they can, but they can't hit ALL the marks, especially if one of those marks creates an unintended imbalance.

I applaud the inventor of the tornado boomerang and admire his genious. But despite this, the argument that "this takes skill" is rather silly in light of the fact that it still works around one of the rules CCP intended. Its like saying con-artists/white-collar criminals/etc. should be allowed because they're amazingly smart and what they do takes a whole lot of skill.

In the end, big props to the creator of this little workaround, very good work on your solo/duo freighter kills. However, CCP made the obvious and probably the correct choice in this matter. They can't please everyone, especially if doing so would destroy the overall health of their game.

In the meantime, enjoy the game, and take heart at the fact that CCP lS trying. They didn't have to abandon a project (incarna) they'd been devoted to for years, issue formal apologies, and do a complete 360 turnaround and focus on making this game better because their players were screaming at them to do so. Yeah they ****** up, but they owned up to their mistakes and are at the very least trying.

Thank you for reading my wall of text. Fly safe!
Tikera Tissant
#232 - 2012-03-30 20:23:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Tikera Tissant
Katarina Reid wrote:

That is bs tbh. As long as in die in the end there is no exploit.


1. Fit a nano tornado ship.
2. Using alt to bump a freighter.
3. Spending 2-3 minutes boomeranging the freighter, spend 15 minutes boomeranging around to avoid concord.
4. Ship does not die.
5. Repeat until board.

So... exploit.

On the other hand:

1. Fit tornado ship.
2. Using alt to bump a freighter.
3. Shoot freighter until tornado dies.
4. Jump to alt orca, get another tornado.
5. Jump to victim
6. Repeat 3 to 5 until victim is dead.
5. Repeat until board.

That is not an exploit and always has been part of the game and fine by everyone.

The basic idea I guess is that ganking a freighter in high sec (not pvp from wardec, but plain ganking), should also cost enough to not make it possible with a freaking cataclyst if you spend enough time to shoot and warp...
Hell, you can do it with a freakin ibis Roll
Istyn
Freight Club
#233 - 2012-03-30 20:36:43 UTC
You can no longer board a ship while you have a GCC timer so the second scenario is impossible.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#234 - 2012-03-30 20:39:55 UTC
To every ButthurtOops crying about it, do you know why CONCORD exists for a reason?

Its to limit asshat behavior. All destruction all the time just cannot last.

You belive your way is the right way, so what happens if all of EVE is like nullsec with highrisk (like I don't know, 5k active subs of yeasteryears ? Roll). Player A loses his expensive ship, you jerk off to the killmail, Player A finally gets enough isk for another ship which is just crap fit, undocks...and BOOM! Thats right. You win everytime, eventually. Eventually, Player A tires of losing everything, he quits cause his time just isn't worth it anymore and CCP loses a subscription while you get blue ball syndrom from your enjoyment.

Recap:

1. EVE has high risk
2. You blow up a guy, this hasn't changed.
3. Eventually human behavior kicks in, one player tires of it because he cannot advance anywhere himself while losing it all the time.
4. ???
5. PROFIT-LESS!!! CCP loses a customer.

Highsec hasn't changed much, you can still shoot people on site. You just get more repercussions and everytime you find loopholes, CCP slaps it down, but it still does not change....either you or the other guy undock, both can still die.

FFS, get over yourself already. You want highrisk, GTFO of highsec. You cannot spout high risk while blowing up the other guy, YOU need risk to yourself because even the wolf preying on sheep has to deal with the hunter (<-- AKA phrase is complete circle, EVERYONE IS AT RISK not just your sheep). High risk isn't Mission Bear dying to Low Risk Mr. No Talent Flipping Cans hoping the Active Tank fires back, because thats just stupid for him against Passive Buffer faster firing short range guns...EVERYTIME you will win! No risk to yourself, because you know the odds. Derp, who didn't know that but the Darwin tards firing back.

And evading CONCORD does not mean increasing the time spent avoiding them by warping around (cause, in warp...THEY CAN'T SHOOT YOU AND HAVE TRAVEL TIME TO RESPOND which means EXPLOIT!), you get 1 action and they respond to pop you in the nose. FFS, who else didn't think that was an idiot and just ripe for dealing with the issue.
Tikera Tissant
#235 - 2012-03-30 20:53:26 UTC
Istyn wrote:
You can no longer board a ship while you have a GCC timer so the second scenario is impossible.


Oh yeah I forgot about that.
Oh noes Twisted

But tbh people have to agree that the single tornado ganking an NPC corped 180K+ ehp ship, i a bit ridiculous, even if you can do it.
Same as using war dec alliance to avoid wars etc.
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#236 - 2012-03-30 21:23:42 UTC
Katarina Reid wrote:

That is bs tbh. As long as in die in the end there is no exploit. Concords job is to kill u in the end if u warp and kill others its ok as long as u die in the end. if u want to change concords job thats up to up. Dont pretend it was its job all along and we are doing something out of the rules. Can we target and kill other targets on same grid with no warping? Is concords job now to makesure u stay in the same place and only kill 1 target per gank. Im sure i heard concords job was to kill your ship if u gank to provide consequences not to makesure u die on grid or before u kill someone else.


btw, the exploit was also using another ship, without consequence, to bump the freighter.
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2012-03-30 21:28:02 UTC
Red Frog Rufen wrote:


btw, the exploit was also using another ship, without consequence, to bump the freighter.


Nerf bumping!
Garven Dreis
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#238 - 2012-03-30 21:43:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Garven Dreis
This is truly a sad day for piracy.

EDIT:

Aqriue wrote:
To every ButthurtOops crying about it, do you know why CONCORD exists for a reason?

Its to limit asshat behavior. All destruction all the time just cannot last.

You belive your way is the right way, so what happens if all of EVE is like nullsec with highrisk (like I don't know, 5k active subs of yeasteryears ? Roll). Player A loses his expensive ship, you jerk off to the killmail, Player A finally gets enough isk for another ship which is just crap fit, undocks...and BOOM! Thats right. You win everytime, eventually. Eventually, Player A tires of losing everything, he quits cause his time just isn't worth it anymore and CCP loses a subscription while you get blue ball syndrom from your enjoyment.

Recap:

1. EVE has high risk
2. You blow up a guy, this hasn't changed.
3. Eventually human behavior kicks in, one player tires of it because he cannot advance anywhere himself while losing it all the time.
4. ???
5. PROFIT-LESS!!! CCP loses a customer.

Highsec hasn't changed much, you can still shoot people on site. You just get more repercussions and everytime you find loopholes, CCP slaps it down, but it still does not change....either you or the other guy undock, both can still die.

FFS, get over yourself already. You want highrisk, GTFO of highsec. You cannot spout high risk while blowing up the other guy, YOU need risk to yourself because even the wolf preying on sheep has to deal with the hunter (<-- AKA phrase is complete circle, EVERYONE IS AT RISK not just your sheep). High risk isn't Mission Bear dying to Low Risk Mr. No Talent Flipping Cans hoping the Active Tank fires back, because thats just stupid for him against Passive Buffer faster firing short range guns...EVERYTIME you will win! No risk to yourself, because you know the odds. Derp, who didn't know that but the Darwin tards firing back.

And evading CONCORD does not mean increasing the time spent avoiding them by warping around (cause, in warp...THEY CAN'T SHOOT YOU AND HAVE TRAVEL TIME TO RESPOND which means EXPLOIT!), you get 1 action and they respond to pop you in the nose. FFS, who else didn't think that was an idiot and just ripe for dealing with the issue.


So many tears, please demonstrate on this model where the Tornado touched you.

Terrible Poster Runner-up 2014

Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#239 - 2012-03-30 21:48:58 UTC
It's not actually the boomerang nerf that saddens me. We knew that was coming and once we saw what it could do to a freighter it was pretty clear that there were applications to it that shouldn't be allowed.

What saddens me is the spirit of the law vs. letter of the law thing. What that says to me is that if a GM (who I'm told aren't allowed to grief) decides he doesn't like the cut of your jib, any attempt at cleverness on your part is bannable. Emergent gameplay be damned.
Pisov viet
Perkone
Caldari State
#240 - 2012-03-30 22:11:44 UTC
I'm a bit unsure, is it still legit to click on buttons while in highsec?