These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
54a
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#201 - 2012-03-30 17:17:24 UTC
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.


All I have to say to you is ..... of of Shocked
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#202 - 2012-03-30 17:21:58 UTC
54a wrote:
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.


All I have to say to you is ..... of of Shocked



Could you please make even less sense?
Liiza Valora
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2012-03-30 17:28:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Liiza Valora
Dead Loss wrote:
I can't wrap my head around the fact that trying to evade Concord is an exploit.

Concord represents the justice in the game and a lot of players aim at avoiding justice because they are criminals (pirates etc).

So how is that helping the sandbox concept ?

Maybe it's time for CCP to make a public announcement on the fact that they have renounced to the sandbox concept and that due to their recent corporate friending with other video games companies they need to turn this game into a player-safe environment.

Maybe it would be better for a lot of players if you were upstraight honest for once.




LOLz, are you just realizing now at this moment that CCP has left the sandbox concept behind? CCP left the sandbox YEARS ago. The game we play Jumped the shark the moment CCP turned from its player base and sold the sand right out of the box. Your playing World of Fail-craft in space mate. If you think it's bad now wait until FAIL-514 hits. EVE is nearly dead and has been dying a slow death for years. The sky is failing. Yes it is.

How can we fix it you ask? Its simple don't re-sub. Money is what talks in the world today, not common sense. CCP already lost 20% of their player base over incarna. I think they want to self-destruct.

CCP why don't you do this. Double shard the server and run a full on open ended PvP sandbox and a full on protected PvE server. Its in my opinion the only way your game is going to survive another 6 months.


So, CCP other than adding PvP flags for looting a can, wreck, or joining factional warfare when are you chuckle noobs gonna add PvP flags for the rest of the stuff in eve? This is where your headed, you know it and so do the rest of us. So instead of getting 6 more months of money out of me just go ahead and do it already. Bring on the PvP flags.
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#204 - 2012-03-30 17:42:35 UTC
I'm not a pirate or a ganker (I did steal some plagioclase from a jetcanning miner once, just for kicks). I pointed out the obvious loophole in the official GM ruling because it was so shockingly clear that the GMs hadn't even read the original explanation of the boomerang, in which the inventor of the maneuver was warping back and forth from one end of a belt to another (i.e., on one grid).

I was awed when I read the original post about the boomerang maneuver. This sort of creative use of game mechanics is exactly the sort of thing that I love about sandbox games. I am very disappointed in CCP's response.

Kill the sandbox, CCP. Just kill it. My sub runs out in about two weeks and I'm not sure I want to extend it at this point.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#205 - 2012-03-30 17:42:37 UTC
Liiza Valora wrote:
CCP already lost 20% of their player base over incarna. I think they want to self-destruct.

I too can pluck random numbers from my butt

38

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Takoten Yaken
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#206 - 2012-03-30 17:45:10 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
Aebe Amraen wrote:
Indeed. According to the ruling, the boomerang maneuver is still legal as long as you stay on grid. Pirates rejoice! Take advantage of this GM oversight as much as possible before CCP notices the loophole.


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.

you're the least fun people ever
Pamela Podpopper
Doomheim
#207 - 2012-03-30 17:45:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Pamela Podpopper
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.



When will the patch be released where every possible item in highsec is wrapped in bubble wrap and passive 'Total Invulnerability' bots that protect every ship in Empire space?

CCP... yusomadbro?

Why dont you get off your fat derrieres and do something about bots, or something instead of coddling these pathetic bears?

oh yeah, i forgot... MONEY
satisfy the masses, no matter how spineless it makes you look, and the $$$ rolls in.

CCP ridin dirty.
GM Homonoia
Game Master Retirement Home
#208 - 2012-03-30 17:55:31 UTC
Pamela Podpopper 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.



When will the patch be released where every possible item in highsec is wrapped in bubble wrap and passive 'Total Invulnerability' bots that protect every ship in Empire space?

CCP... yusomadbro?

Why dont you get off your fat derrieres and do something about bots, or something instead of coddling these pathetic bears?

oh yeah, i forgot... MONEY
satisfy the masses, no matter how spineless it makes you look, and the $$$ rolls in.

CCP ridin dirty.


Yeah! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMnjF1O4eH0

Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#209 - 2012-03-30 18:01:49 UTC
Oh come on. You guys honestly thought this wasn't going to get deemed an exploit after the freighter ganks in high sec? There may have been a lot of proposed changes that I've disagreed with or find annoying (to put it lightly) but this one was an obvious incoming, particularly once freighters were getting tag teamed in high sec. AFK freighting or no, that just seemed a little too easy.

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
Paul Clancy
Korpu no Byakko
#210 - 2012-03-30 18:03:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Paul Clancy
GM Homonoia, sorry, but I want ask you one thing if you don't mind...

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1563403&page=1#15

- is your answer here about grid foo and other questionable tactics still correct?

Ah, and what about container spamming and logintraps while we're at it? I'm trying to summarize the politics for one post.

Thanks!
GM Homonoia
Game Master Retirement Home
#211 - 2012-03-30 18:04:55 UTC
Paul Clancy wrote:
GM Homonoia, sorry, but I want ask you one thing if you don't mind...

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1563403&page=1#15

- is your answer here about grid foo and other questionable tactics still correct?

Thanks!


Yes, that is still correct.

Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master
Paul Clancy
Korpu no Byakko
#212 - 2012-03-30 18:07:18 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
Paul Clancy wrote:
GM Homonoia, sorry, but I want ask you one thing if you don't mind...

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1563403&page=1#15

- is your answer here about grid foo and other questionable tactics still correct?

Thanks!


Yes, that is still correct.


Please while we're at it, answer two more (final) questions of my edited post? Logintraps and container spam?
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#213 - 2012-03-30 18:24:09 UTC
Henry Haphorn wrote:
Regardless, Concord can still be lured away using the tried, tested, and effective method known to many as shown below.

1. Orca Alt warps to safespot and dumps fully-fitted gank ships into space.
2. -10 ganker hops into one of the ships and warps out to bookmarked target.
3. -10 ganker kills target and loses his ship to Concord.
4. -10 ganker warps back.
5. Repeat from step 2.

As soon as you board a ship with a GCC, Concord will move away from the belt to chase you in your safespot. When they see that you left the safespot they will warp again and chase you down.

But I have a very important question to the GM:

Based on the wording of the community bulletin, does this mean that it's perfectly ok to do the steps I mentioned above because the GCC was acquired in that once specific grid on the belt? Either way, Concord will chase the gank as soon as a ship is boarded in space.

EDIT:

Another question, does boarding a ship with an outlaw status incur only the attention of the Faction Navy or does that include Concord? ...before ganking a target.


I'm still waiting for my answer. After all, I'm risking one of my alts' sec status just to become an outlaw.

Adapt or Die
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#214 - 2012-03-30 18:26:20 UTC
yeah, this game wrap in bubble everything in high sec., because :

- you can't gank a freighter anymore.. oh wait!
- you can't kill indus/miners anymore.. oh wait!
- you can't wardec a corp anymore.. oh wait they're fixing that!

numbers of pilot online.are back to pre-incarna, my guess it's the game is pretty healthy.
Memrox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#215 - 2012-03-30 18:33:41 UTC
GM Homonoia, tell Hilmar this, you start removing stuff like this your removing the soul of EVE.

GG and goodbye if you do.
JD Rocketfeller
Rocket Equity
#216 - 2012-03-30 18:38:09 UTC
Memrox wrote:
GM Homonoia, tell Hilmar this, you start removing stuff like this your removing the soul of EVE.

GG and goodbye if you do.

Good riddance, no one wants your exploiting behind in the game anyway.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#217 - 2012-03-30 18:40:12 UTC
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.


I find it odd that we need to be "reminded" of a new rule, as if we've seen it before. Poor choice of words in my opinion.

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. You guys stripped all the wardec rules and continue to allow highsec warfare to be utterly ruined by obvious exploits of game mechanics under the pretense that it was too much to enforce, yet you're okay with adding new rules to prevent this. It's rather disheartening.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Katja Faith
Doomheim
#218 - 2012-03-30 18:41:37 UTC
Memrox wrote:
GM Homonoia, tell Hilmar this, you start removing stuff like this your removing the soul of EVE.

GG and goodbye if you do.


Oooh, another failquitter!! Awesome. :)

Good riddance, don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!
Pamela Podpopper
Doomheim
#219 - 2012-03-30 18:43:40 UTC
JD Rocketfeller wrote:
Memrox wrote:
GM Homonoia, tell Hilmar this, you start removing stuff like this your removing the soul of EVE.

GG and goodbye if you do.

Good riddance, no one wants your exploiting behind in the game anyway.


especially whiny brown nosing bears like *someone*
Subdolus Venator
State War Academy
Caldari State
#220 - 2012-03-30 18:50:10 UTC
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

Well, damn.
So much for "Cops in Spaaaaace..!" I was looking forward to some hair-raising hot pursuits, and tales thereof.

Poopies.

EVE is EVE - Feaces will eventuate.