These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP's inconsistencies in dealing with in-game exploits

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Maliandra
Doomheim
#1 - 2013-09-23 00:21:20 UTC
At the current time, CCP's depiction of what is/isn't a bannable offense due to the use of in-game exploits seems arbitrary and random at best.

This is the scenario I constantly see:
- A set of game features are designed with a certain purpose in mind
- Savvy gamers find a way to exploit these game features to their advantage
- CCP tosses a coin. If it's head, it's bannable. If it's tails, it's not.

For instance, those people who took advantage of factional warfare pricing some time ago and made ridiculous amount of ISK off manipulating the market on certain rare items. CCP deemed it an exploit, fixed it, and applauded the exploiters for their cunning. They were allowed to keep all the ISK they gained.

Then we take a look at the WH optimal range exploiters. That corp that pretty much found a way to get their optimal range to 150km on projectile turrets and just farmed the crap out of every ship - human or AI - in their vicinity. CCP deemed it an exploit, fixed it.... but wait... did NOT applaud them for their cunning. Rather, fined them 30 billion ISK or something.

Where is the consistency in that? Both groups did pretty much the same thing. It's like you guys have decided you are okay with people exploiting the market, exploiting people, exploiting whatever they want as long as it's not the dear PVP system that is held to such high regard.

You guys need to act with consistency. People who play this game are of certain personalities and most of those personalities will prefer logic and reason behind decision making processes. There is no logic and reason to picking and choosing what you guys think should be bannable versus applauded.

And now with the drones... just ridiculous. That's a design decision you guys over looked. It should never be up to the users to make up for that fact. We should be able to use any such "exploits" until which time you fix it. If not. one can argue that anything that goes against it's originally design intention is considered an exploit and should be ban worthy. I hope you guys at CCP realize just how many things that would be. That is probably exactly why you have to pick and choose which to ban for, but is thus why you shouldn't pick and choose which to ban for.

If it is being said that all combat exploits are bannable I understand the sentiment. It's unrealistic to enforce that however. Define exploit. Think about the combat in this game. Any time someone uses any feature in a way it wasn't intended you're gonna have to ban them. Good luck banning half the community, lol.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2 - 2013-09-23 00:25:18 UTC
You missed a few facts in your rant there.
Like the fact said WH corp had asked a GM & been told it wasn't allowed.
Then asked another GM a differently worded question which didn't have specific information, and used that answer to claim they were allowed, despite having been told by the first GM they weren't.
I.E. Didn't like what mum said so ran and asked dad.

Also what CCP are doing is standard industry practice. If a significant exploit is found that isn't a quick slap coding fix, but will take some time and has to make sure it breaks nothing else, it's put out to the community that it is bannable and people don't do it.
Every MMO I've ever played has had exploits dealt with like that, simply 'don't do it, it's bannable' because the 'fix' was complicated.
Christopher AET
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-09-23 00:36:01 UTC
Nobody was banned over the drone fight (I was there). We were simply told not to do it any more. Finding and using it in the first place is not punishable. But doing so after the devs have spoken is.

I drain ducks of their moisture for sustenance.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-09-23 00:36:07 UTC
Maliandra wrote:
For instance, those people who took advantage of factional warfare pricing some time ago and made ridiculous amount of ISK off manipulating the market on certain rare items. CCP deemed it an exploit, fixed it, and applauded the exploiters for their cunning. They were allowed to keep all the ISK they gained.


Bullshit.

The Faction Five did not keep a dime that they made from the FOREX scheme, it was all seized by the GMs. They were never "applauded for their cunning" by CCP and the only reason they didn't get banned was because they tried to inform CCP before they even began the scheme.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
stoicfaux
#5 - 2013-09-23 00:53:25 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
FW Dev Blog: THE FW EXPLOIT 2012 (OR: HOW I LEARNED ABOUT FOREX)

Quote:
The people who sought to benefit from this exploit will receive no gain from this system. Because this was essentially a system where you could print LP, even if ISK was provided as an input, it is classified as an exploit.

Because the players made efforts to inform us about the issue their accounts will remain in good standing. We have temporarily seized all LP points and store items from them. Once we're done determining how much each person has benefitted we will remove the LP gained value in LP and items and return the ISK invested in the purchase of items to them. This essentially will set each of them back to the original point at which they began this activity. The person who reported the issue will receive the usual PLEX for Snitches reward.

I wrote a blog on "Responsible Disclosures" a year or so ago. In that blog I mention that telling us about something after you've used the heck out of it isn't what we consider to be responsible. We do our best to be lenient in cases such as this but we want this to serve as a notice to the community that the proper time to alert us to the issue was before actually using the system. I can understand a desire to test the limits but we don't believe two weeks of testing a bug or exploit should net a tremendous benefit in lieu of reporting it in the first place, and that is another reason why the LP activity will be reversed back to zero.



edit: Also, CCP isn't Turbine
edit2: Google on "ccp eve faction warfare currency manipulation" for more details/drama.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-09-23 01:40:08 UTC
It's easy to get outraged when you haven't the faintest clue what the facts actually are.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#7 - 2013-09-23 01:56:06 UTC
Gorn Arming wrote:
It's easy to get outraged when you haven't the faintest clue what the facts actually are.

Goons are literally bob

grrbob

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
ISD Cura Ursus
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#8 - 2013-09-23 02:06:34 UTC
Thread locked as we do not allow ranting or trolling on the forums.


Please note, if you have issue with the decision made by a GM or a dev, please feel free to contact support@eve-online.com with the issue.

I cannot guarantee that it will get solved that way, but I can tell you that whatever your issue is it will not be solved by ranting on the forums.

ISD Cura Ursus

Lieutenant Commander

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department