These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

gridfu

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2015-11-19 21:31:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
seriously ccp, when the **** are you going to fix this ****?

why is the grid on this station undock only 60km long?

Do you have any plans to fix this or is this working as intended?

dont worry, i dont actually expect any ccp replies. I dont think any highsec players have an issue with this stuff so who cares, right?

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#2 - 2015-11-19 21:34:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Go check out what's happening with grids on SiSi.

Grids there are currently about 25,000 km wide and CCP are playing with the figures due to issues that huge grids are creating, so they can release them to TQ. Bigger grids are needed when Citadels are released as the XL Citadel is larger than the current grid size. So work on this very issue is currently underway.

Even with the new grids, grid foo will still be possible (so working as intended), but much less likely.

There's been lots of news on this lately.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#3 - 2015-11-19 21:34:29 UTC
What does this post achieve?

Other than giving the local trolls a new thread to play in, not much. HTFU.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#4 - 2015-11-19 21:40:34 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
What does this post achieve?

Other than giving the local trolls a new thread to play in, not much. HTFU.


right. so players can manipulate the grid to the point where the grid is smaller than my locking range, and i need to just HTFU. lmfao
Its a glaring bug that has existed for LITERALLY over a decade. The fact its not been fixed is obscene. And the mouthbreather mentality of defending CCP for being deliberately ignorant about the exploit for literally a decade, also explains why theres so many ******* problems in the real world as well

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#5 - 2015-11-19 21:44:45 UTC
GD is not the place to cry about it.

File a petition or something.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2015-11-19 21:45:41 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Go check out what's happening with grids on SiSi.

Grids there are currently about 25,000 km wide and CCP are playing with the figures due to issues that huge grids are creating, so they can release them to TQ. Bigger grids are needed when Citadels are released as the XL Citadel is larger than the current grid size. So work on this very issue is currently underway.

Even with the new grids, grid foo will still be possible (so working as intended), but much less likely.

There's been lots of news on this lately.


in other words, they dont actually care that theres a major exploit/bug active in their game for decades, the only reason they're going to do anything about it is the new selling feature on their next expansion might have problems with it. lol.

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#7 - 2015-11-19 21:46:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
All this over the loss of a Noctis?

Yeah maybe HTFU is appropriate.

Grid Fu is not an exploit. It never has been.

Here is the list of known and declared exploits:

https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/204873262-Known-Declared-Exploits?flash_digest=7ee08de0463507ab789f2fc2cc71a5f0534081b1

Grid Manipulation is specifically a non-exploit.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2015-11-19 21:49:48 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
GD is not the place to cry about it.

File a petition or something.


what is a petition going to accomplish?
"logs show nothing"

I dont even care about the loss. 80mil to me is the equivalent of a 5k isk shuttle.
What pisses me off is this exploit still exists and ccp honestly doesnt give a ****.

maybe if we're lucky, fozzie will introduce some timers to the grid mechanics?

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2015-11-19 21:53:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
Scipio Artelius wrote:
All this over the loss of a Noctis?

Yeah maybe HTFU is appropriate.

Grid Fu is not an exploit. It never has been.

Here is the list of known and declared exploits:

https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/204873262-Known-Declared-Exploits?flash_digest=7ee08de0463507ab789f2fc2cc71a5f0534081b1



exactly, ccp doesnt even give a ****.
It IS an exploit. are you telling me this is an intended game mechanic? or is this a bug in the grid mechanics that players are exploiting, and ccp simply doesn't give a ****, and never bothered listing it as an exploit?


And no, its not about the noctis, as i said, i couldnt care about the ship. thats pocket change to me. Thats why this is a forum post and not a petition. if by some holy miracle the FSM returns and convinces ccp to actually make a ship reimbursement, that wont fix the fact this grid will get ****** up tomorrow again.

What this is about, is every week im dealing with exploited grids. Last week in w-4n there was at least 5 different grids within 200km of the station. My intercepter could fly though 5 different grids in under 30 seconds.

how is this NOT an exploit? I would like a logical explanation on how you people come to the conclusion this isn't a bug that is being exploited?
"its not on ccps list" is not a logical explanation. That is a mouthbreather response. CCP simply didnt include it on their list because it would probably take a lot of reworking "legacy code" blah blah blah. so.... blame the players instead... "HTFU"



Imagine if you were playing fallout4, and you look out across the wasteland, everything looks safe... "i shall continue on my journey" you say! you take 2 steps and suddenly appears a gang of supermutants hammering on you.
When you report this to bethesda, all their fanboys tell you to shut the **** up and deal with it "if you dont like it, quit!", "its not a bug, its a feature!"

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#10 - 2015-11-19 21:55:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Terminal Insanity wrote:
It IS an exploit. are you telling me this is an intended game mechanic?...

...nd ccp simply doesnt give a ****, and never bothered listing it as an exploit?

Read the list of non-exploits.

Second one in the list: Grid Manipulation

It's not that CCP never bothered to list it as an exploit. They've specifically ruled that it isn't an exploit.

Terminal Insanity wrote:
how is this NOT an exploit? I would like a logical explanation on how you people come to the conclusion this isn't a bug that is being exploited?

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I just go off what CCP say, especially in situations where they make a specific ruling that it's not an exploit.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#11 - 2015-11-19 22:16:27 UTC
why should it be an exploit?

also umm let me tell you about this nifty feature called d-scan

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2015-11-19 22:16:45 UTC
Okay so what is the lore explaination for this?

If this isnt a "bug" with the "mechanics", then certainly there is a lore explaination?

Otherwise, CCP claiming this isn't an exploit just means CCP has no idea what the definition of "exploit" is.

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#13 - 2015-11-19 22:19:49 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
no idea what the definition of "exploit" is.


so what is an "exploit" Question

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2015-11-19 22:20:04 UTC
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
why should it be an exploit?

also umm let me tell you about this nifty feature called d-scan


If i could do this in any other videogame, it would easily be called an exploit. If i could limit your vision in Battlefield, Team Fortress or whatever else you play to just a few feet infront of you, you'd just HTFU and deal with it right? If while you played Fallout4 supermutants just appeared directly infront of you, and no, they dont have any stealthboy, you'd just HTFU and deal with it, right?

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#15 - 2015-11-19 22:21:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Okay so what is the lore explaination for this?

If this isnt a "bug" with the "mechanics", then certainly there is a lore explaination?

Otherwise, CCP claiming this isn't an exploit just means CCP has no idea what the definition of "exploit" is.

Keep crying. This is quite enjoyable.

Why does there have to be a lore reason for exploits? Exploits aren't based on lore, they're based mostly on gameplay.

Not a single currently declared exploit or ruled non-exploit is lore based. They are all gameplay based.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2015-11-19 22:23:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Okay so what is the lore explaination for this?

If this isnt a "bug" with the "mechanics", then certainly there is a lore explaination?

Otherwise, CCP claiming this isn't an exploit just means CCP has no idea what the definition of "exploit" is.

Keep crying. This is quite enjoyable.

Why does there have to be a lore reason for exploits? Exploits aren't based on lore, they're based mostly on gameplay.


I thought this wasnt an exploit? but now it is?

So, when its not convenient to fix the code, its not an exploit.
But we dont want to bother with creating a lore reason for it ether, so it is an exploit!
But we still dont want to fix the code, so its not an exploit
but why would there be any lore explaination for an exploit!

ether there is an intended reason why this happens, or there isnt.
Ether this was an intended game mechanic, or CCP's idea of "emergent gameplay", or this was an unintended side-effect of how they programmed the game mechanic, and now players are manipulating it beyond what was originally intended

Ether way, i'd like an official explaination of why capsuleers in new eden are experiencing interference with their scanner systems. Perhaps Empress Jamyl could address new eden about this grave situation with the mysterious barriers in space that are being created. Perhaps its caused by drifter technology?

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Paranoid Loyd
#17 - 2015-11-19 22:29:07 UTC
Your tears are glorious.

It's not an exploit.

You are crying about a Noctis? Really?

Where was your insta undock?

Learn to eve, not cry.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#18 - 2015-11-19 22:29:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Terminal Insanity wrote:
I thought this wasnt an exploit? but now it is?

What?

Did you even read the list?

Here, I'll even quote the start of it for you:

Common Misconceptions about Exploits

This passage contains common tactics and other player conduct that is often mistakenly reported as exploits but are in fact not.

Where did you suddenly jump to now it's an exploit?

Terminal Insanity wrote:
So, when its not convenient to fix the code, its not an exploit.
But we dont want to bother with creating a lore reason for it ether, so it is an exploit!
But we still dont want to fix the code, so its not an exploit
but why would there be any lore explaination for an exploit!

No. When it's ruled not an exploit, it's not an exploit.

As to why would there be a lore explanation, yeah I'm still wondering. You asked what the lore explanation is for it not being an exploit, but lore doesn't have anything to do with any of the exploits. The lore, for the list of current exploits and non-exploits, is irrelevant.
Austneal
Nero Fazione
#19 - 2015-11-19 22:30:27 UTC
It's not an exploit. It's a deliberate game mechanic.

Also comparing TF2 and Battlefield to Eve...
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2015-11-19 22:32:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
Austneal wrote:
It's not an exploit. It's a deliberate game mechanic.



This is literally hilarious.

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
12Next page