EVE General Discussion

They make the definition of what exploit means in their game. It matters not what the term means elsewhere.

We defend it because it is not an exploit, no matter how many times you use the term.

May I suggest you do not post then and let the adults continue the discussion. Thank you kindly.

EvE is not so removed from gaming to defy even gaming definitions. Point blank.

As long as the devs didn't design it, and players discovered it, and uses what they discovered for an advantage, it's an exploit.

You want to hide under CCP's skirt because they allow it, but it doesn't change the definition.

You do know that language is not set in stone and that words are often redefined over time depending on their usage. The fact that we are even discussing what an "exploit" actually is and can't agree is literally proof of that.

But the definition of the term exploit as used by CCP in their game called Eve, is very specific. Point blank. No matter how much you wish otherwise.

As Tippia already stated. Bumping is a well-know, well-established, and intentional mechanic that some guys come out of the woodwork to incorrectly label as an exploit. So why should we hide under any skirt?

Yeah, all those Dream Paragon supporters said the same. Dream Paragon still got a 10 day suspension and lost the world first -- and they deserved it. When professional gamers cheat, it's b-a-d. They know better.

http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/1549389227?page=1

Worst thing about that exploit was the excuses made, like if they didn't do it...the others would.

If folks got to exploit to play or have fun..."Houston, we have a problem..."

…and no-one says it is. All we're saying is that there is no universal definition and that the only ones who can define what is and what isn't an exploit in any specific game is that game's developers. Only they can decide what you can and cannot legitimately do. Only they can judge whether or not some particular use goes against the overall intent of the mechanics involved.

No. As long as the devs feel that some particular use of a mechanic produces undesirable outcomes, it is an exploit. Whether the players discovered it or not only matters to the extent the devs are fans of emergent gameplay. CCP are very big fans of this.

So the fact remains: it is not an exploit. There is no way around this — especially not your attempts to impose some non-existing law from on high.

What exploit?

Sorry, I've just been painfully following some of the threads you have posted in recently and am just sick of your tiresome need to try to impose your beliefs and what other game companies do on EVE as if you have some kind of special insight.

We get it, you've played a lot of other games and you want EVE to fit your world view. I am again sorry to inform you that CCP does things differently here, sometimes even to their detriment.

If pointing that out that makes me an alt-of-an-alt, I guess that's your problem.

…only CCP's.
They are the only ones who can define what the term means within the ruleset of the game they created.

So you can stop trying to apply your invented definition and instead use the only one that matters: CCP's — the one that makes none of what's been described in this thread as any kind of exploit.