These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[RSS] Exploit notification: "Boomerang" - avoiding CONCORD in high security space

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#161 - 2012-04-19 11:34:54 UTC
Corp 5py wrote:
The exploit part is leaving the grid where Global Criminal Cooldown was acquired.

Boomerang was:

1. shoot ship 1
2. warp off grid before concord shows up <--exploit, this bit gets you banned now
3. Warp back to ship 1, shoot again (or shoot some other ship) while concord is still in warp
4. repeat


You may, however, warp on the same grid, thus making a mini-boomerang manover. The leaving the grid part is the bannable bit... what if you don't leave the grid ?


Leaving the grid while CONCORD is en route, if I interpret the various posts correctly, means that CONCORD will have to warp to your new destination.

Using a 'boomarang' tactic effectively keeps CONCORD from arriving, because they're constantly warping back and forth between grids in a pointless chase.

I stand ready to be corrected, though.

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....
DelBoy Trades
Trotter Independent Traders.
#162 - 2012-04-19 12:22:01 UTC
If Concorde aren't programmed well enough to catch criminals then that should be too bad. It's not a sandbox when you have to abide by rules put in by a higher power.

Damn nature, you scary!
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#163 - 2012-04-19 12:27:44 UTC
One of my favorite threads just boomeranged back from the dead. Nice.
Dr Silkworth
#164 - 2012-04-19 16:20:42 UTC
Resisting arrest imperils the lives of our fine officers. The slightest twitch should bring enough concord to lag the system then laze and taze and spray your pod too.
MarkusDaguire
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#165 - 2012-05-08 12:00:20 UTC  |  Edited by: MarkusDaguire
This is against the spirit of the game. In real life, you can get robbed outside a police station, is this an exploit? I tell you one thing, the robber sure as hell will run away.

If I attacked someone and warped off before Concord arrive and kept running until my timer expired (if it does), would that be an exploit? It seems that CCP are just making losing your ship a fixed penalty. I guess someone bouncing around hisec in a battleship, popping miners left right and centre would need to be stopped. But enforcing a 1:1 fixed penalty policy on gankers to gankees is not in the sandbox spirit.

Last of all, for any gankers who are crying about this, why not go pop miners in losec or 0.0, the only police response there is player controlled. The two sides here are very similar, carebears crying about being popped, and gankers crying about being popped. Attacking people and being in possesion of something value are both reasons for someone to attack you.

I have to say I'm with the gankers though, evolution does not occur without selection pressure. Perhaps changes to the mechanics allowing miners to defend themselves better. The pressure from gankers wouid force miners to use proper logistics and fly in fleets, to use escorts. This can only be a good thing. A real cause and real effect. In the wild west everyone carried a gun, even in safe areas. This approach would make everyone happy, except bot miners.

Hisec may be intended to be the safest part of the Eve universe, but why force it to be a Utopia for carebears I dont understand. Although, from my own experiences mining, I would actually say I felt safer in 0.0 mining than I did in Empire space.
Sobach
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2012-05-08 12:09:57 UTC
MarkusDaguire wrote:
I have to say I'm with the gankers though, evolution does not occur without selection pressure. Perhaps changes to the mechanics allowing miners to defend themselves better. The pressure from gankers wouid force miners to use proper logistics and fly in fleets, to use escorts. This can only be a good thing. A real cause and real effect. In the wild west everyone carried a gun, even in safe areas. This approach would make everyone happy, except bot miners.

Hisec may be intended to be the safest part of the Eve universe, but why force it to be a Utopia for carebears I dont understand. Although, from my own experiences mining, I would actually say I felt safer in 0.0 mining than I did in Empire space.



yay for necro-ing a dead thread to beat the dead and buried horse that has already passed into the afterlife.

suffice to say that the tactic did not only affect miners, and was used with remarkable results against freighters. CCP decided that a single tornado should not be able to kill a freighter or jump freighter, amongst other things, so there you go, now let the dead horse rest in peace.
MarkusDaguire
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#167 - 2012-05-08 12:16:28 UTC
Sobach wrote:

yay for necro-ing a dead thread to beat the dead and buried horse that has already passed into the afterlife.

suffice to say that the tactic did not only affect miners, and was used with remarkable results against freighters. CCP decided that a single tornado should not be able to kill a freighter or jump freighter, amongst other things, so there you go, now let the dead horse rest in peace.


I didnt check the dates actually. This thread was near the top of the list in the forum.... anyway there are all kinds of fun things you can do with or to a dead horse. Why bury it?

If you dont want a tornado to be able to kill a freighter, dont you think it would have been better to give the freighter more survivability, than to give Concord superpowers.

To be brutally simple about it, this is why fighter planes got faster, tanks got tougher and people got smarter.
Sobach
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2012-05-08 12:34:15 UTC
MarkusDaguire wrote:
I didnt check the dates actually. This thread was near the top of the list in the forum.... anyway there are all kinds of fun things you can do with or to a dead horse. Why bury it?

If you dont want a tornado to be able to kill a freighter, dont you think it would have been better to give the freighter more survivability, than to give Concord superpowers.

To be brutally simple about it, this is why fighter planes got faster, tanks got tougher and people got smarter.


/shrug, It was CCP's decision, and one that frankly was widely expected by just about everyone. It's one thing to skirt in/around the grey areas, but it's another when you're having a rave party in it while tweeting the rest of the universe about it.

and frankly, if they gave freighters more survivability, it'd simply make boomerang into a required tactic for all suicide gankers, in which case you'd just have a different camp of gankers crying about it.
Iron Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#169 - 2012-05-08 13:11:13 UTC
Sooooooo, attacking someone in hs and then warp to a wh and jump into that wh is an exploit ????Shocked
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#170 - 2012-05-08 14:04:24 UTC
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
I am not sure I understand this right...

Attack someone. Get a GCC. Manage to warp away escaping CONCORD. Considered an exploit?

If this is true...how does it make any kind of logical sense at all that escaping the police is an exploit?


Same as in real life. Running from the cops makes things worse. Hey, there's an idea, if you run from CONCORD successfully, you get a 2 hour GCC, can't dock and can't escape in to anything lower than a 0.5 :D Oh and the 2 hour GCC pauses if you log off :D

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#171 - 2012-05-08 14:16:15 UTC
Iron Civire wrote:
Sooooooo, attacking someone in hs and then warp to a wh and jump into that wh is an exploit ????Shocked


You can't escape CONCORD's mysterious voodoo.
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#172 - 2012-05-08 14:41:48 UTC
so what exactly is wrong with pulling a Bonnie & Clyde in high-sec?


isn't it within the spirit of the GAME for a criminal to create a crime wave in a system?

too often you guys blame ****** game mechanics on the players
it's been 9 ******* years guys... don't you know how your game works yet?
Ira Theos
#173 - 2012-05-08 15:04:35 UTC
Why does this thread bring this to my mind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9XEGBrA99E
Wolf Kruol
Suicide Squad Gamma
#174 - 2012-05-08 15:24:15 UTC
Concord is pointless remove it.

“If you're very very stupid? How can you possibly realize you're very very stupid?

You have to be relatively intelligent to realize how stupid you really are!”
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#175 - 2012-05-08 16:51:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Hakaru Ishiwara
GM Homonoia wrote:
PriorofDeath wrote:
"it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid where you gained that GCC"

so stay on grid and boomerange? Still WIN.

Gridfoo you ninjas


We are looking into how far this can be stretched. Even if you think you have found a loop hole, do not use it without asking a GM for clarification. Doing so anyway could still result in repercussions.
Create a sandbox, let the biggest bully in the game **** all over [Jita] the premier market system and then try to constrain players from gaming the system?

That is one of the most convoluted things that I have seen in EVE.

If CCP is to condone mass griefing, then why aren't they allowing for escape from punishment to those who are smart enough?

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.
Saia Tae Arragosa
Doomheim
#176 - 2012-05-08 17:20:43 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:
We adjusted the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous. See the full text here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1

I also have to restate that we value the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Also avoiding CONCORD in any way is simply not allowed, attempts to find loopholes in the wording will not fly.


Ok. I've read the link. Here's a copypasta of the relevant section:

Quote:
‘If you gain a Global Criminal Countdown by committing an illegal action in high security space, it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid where you gained that GCC, even if you later return to that grid while still affected by that GCC.



Riddle me this:

Bob kills a mackinaw at an ice belt. Concord arrives. Bob warps to a point 150k away on the same grid. He is still on grid, concord is still on grid, he never left grid. Concord moves to intercept him, on grid. He warps to another on-grid bounce, because his ship has inertial stabs to align fast. He warps (still on the same grid) to another mackinaw, and pops it. Repeat. Bob has been on grid the entire time.

In this way, in a .5 or .6 system, it is possible to kill many mackinaws without leaving grid before finally succumbing to concord.

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say this violates the "spirit of the law". Perhaps you should change the law as follows:

After obtaining GCC and killing someone, it is mandatory for a player to offline all modules, bring their ship to a complete stop, and assume the position.

I think this would get rid of any and all ambiguity.

Edit: The above requires no special 'gridfoo', it only requires the grid to be greater than 150k. Most icebelts have grid larger than 300k.



There was a guy in a system with a -8.3 sec rating doing this. He was drawing Concorde to one belt, then running over to another and ganking people. How does a player with a -8. sec rating even fly in a high sec area rated .8 without Concorde actively persuing them? o.O
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#177 - 2012-05-08 17:38:56 UTC
Saia Tae Arragosa wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:
We adjusted the wording slightly to make it less ambiguous. See the full text here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4972&tid=1

I also have to restate that we value the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. Also avoiding CONCORD in any way is simply not allowed, attempts to find loopholes in the wording will not fly.


Ok. I've read the link. Here's a copypasta of the relevant section:

Quote:
‘If you gain a Global Criminal Countdown by committing an illegal action in high security space, it is considered an exploit to attack a target after you warp away from the grid where you gained that GCC, even if you later return to that grid while still affected by that GCC.



Riddle me this:

Bob kills a mackinaw at an ice belt. Concord arrives. Bob warps to a point 150k away on the same grid. He is still on grid, concord is still on grid, he never left grid. Concord moves to intercept him, on grid. He warps to another on-grid bounce, because his ship has inertial stabs to align fast. He warps (still on the same grid) to another mackinaw, and pops it. Repeat. Bob has been on grid the entire time.

In this way, in a .5 or .6 system, it is possible to kill many mackinaws without leaving grid before finally succumbing to concord.

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say this violates the "spirit of the law". Perhaps you should change the law as follows:

After obtaining GCC and killing someone, it is mandatory for a player to offline all modules, bring their ship to a complete stop, and assume the position.

I think this would get rid of any and all ambiguity.

Edit: The above requires no special 'gridfoo', it only requires the grid to be greater than 150k. Most icebelts have grid larger than 300k.



There was a guy in a system with a -8.3 sec rating doing this. He was drawing Concorde to one belt, then running over to another and ganking people. How does a player with a -8. sec rating even fly in a high sec area rated .8 without Concorde actively persuing them? o.O
Damn it, Jim, this is a sandbox. I sandbox, I say!

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.