These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Comy 1
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#61 - 2012-03-30 17:48:03 UTC
WhyTry1 wrote:
Comy 1 wrote:
WhyTry1 wrote:
@GM or Devs

Any reason why you cant just make CONCORD act faster and harder?
I mean its a game, its not real, you control those metrics and the code behind it


Because there has to be a balance to it. Why would concord act instantly in a 0.5 system, effectively making it a 1.0?

I don't think people PvEing would be happy about mission payouts and asteroid spawns would be the same as in 1.0 in all high sec systems.

The best way to solve these exploits that I have heard of so far is the insta scram and fixed delay depending on system security for the death ray.



So with respect whats the difference insta scram and insta death? you are still going to die, its just delaying it


Instant scram but delayed death allows non alpha ships (like blaster boats) to fire multiple rounds into a ship in e.g. a 0.5 system. This makes more ships than 1400mm artillery boats viable for ganking.
The Crushah
Yarrtards With Epeen
#62 - 2012-03-30 17:50:24 UTC
There are only 3 certainties in this world:

1) Death
2) Taxes
3) CCP getting all butthurt and passive agressive over the unintended consequences of their sandbox game.

"Hey guys, weve created this great game, where you can shape your own universe and carve your own path in the game! But wait... we cant let them do that. Oh dear, we cant let them do that either. Oh no that will never work... You know what, forget it, lets just redefine every item in the game to have a singular focus so that nobody can use it for anything other than what we originally had in mind. Wont that be fun?"
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#63 - 2012-03-30 17:53:10 UTC
CCP did it wrong again.

Why not just make concord quicker with each kill? The ganker is giving up gank in exchange for the inertia stabs which doesnt mean we will actually pop the target.

Also the target has AMPLE oppertunity to prevent this from happening. This is nothing more then a CPA.


CPA - Carebear Protection Act

Auto piloting non escorted freighter = win for carebears....

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#64 - 2012-03-30 18:01:36 UTC
Shouldnt the cops be more on the ball?
Welsige
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2012-03-30 18:05:55 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
that may or may not be more or less strict.


Wut? Pirate

lol ;)

[b]~ 10.058 ~

Free The Mittani[/b]
Welsige
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2012-03-30 18:07:37 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:
CCP did it wrong again.

Why not just make concord quicker with each kill? The ganker is giving up gank in exchange for the inertia stabs which doesnt mean we will actually pop the target.

Also the target has AMPLE oppertunity to prevent this from happening. This is nothing more then a CPA.


CPA - Carebear Protection Act

Auto piloting non escorted freighter = win for carebears....


This, somewhat this rule, even if i do not suicide gank, makes little sense and sounds too artificial.

[b]~ 10.058 ~

Free The Mittani[/b]
Alta Hibra
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#67 - 2012-03-30 18:12:24 UTC
Stop whining. When a single tornado with a bumping alt can kill a freighter in high sec something is obviously broken.

You can still get that freighter kill, but it'll require more isk and more players.
Ntrails
State War Academy
Caldari State
#68 - 2012-03-30 18:14:47 UTC
I don't really see why people are fussing about something that was obviously an exploit from the start being declared an exploit.

:cripes:
Geddon4Life
Doomheim
#69 - 2012-03-30 18:15:09 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
Tarsas Phage wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:

This is incorrect, we act on the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law. Tread that line at your own risk.


This means specific indicidents can be arbitrarily acted upon by different GMs. This is Not Good.


I understand that some people may not like a GM having the right to make a judgement call, but this is something that is also necessary. No set of rules can be held up by the letter of the law. Once you only use the letter of the law you have only 2 options:

1. Accept that people who want to be bad (the people that these laws are here to stop) will always find a loophole to get to the people they want to be bad to (the people these laws are designed to protect); thereby making any system of (social) rules ineffective. The limitations of the human languages simply do not let you define all possible situations; this is why everyone is always expected to act responsibly according to the spirit of the law. To find the balance between sticking to the rules and bending them to innovate is the type of balance that you learn to seek out when you grow up as a kid and get into scrapes on the school yard.

2. OR you can set up the rules so strictly and in such a limiting manner that emergent behavior and any form of innovation becomes completely impossible. We could easily fix this by simply making it impossible to attack anyone in high sec ever, no exceptions. This is a situation no one wants.

In other words, making judgement calls will always be part of running a sandbox game. Making sure that a GM is capable of doing this properly is a very important part of our hiring, training and auditing process. This is also why escalation of a support ticket is always a possibility (from non-senior to senior) and why peer review is a very important part of our operating procedures.


Keep moving the goal posts...
If you do NOT want ships to warp away from the GANK area, then have Concord dictors put a bubble up.
Iggep
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#70 - 2012-03-30 18:18:07 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
PriorofDeath wrote:
Adunh Slavy wrote:
PriorofDeath wrote:
Gridfoo you ninjas



Avoiding the spirit of the law by trying to use the letter of the law, will probably not be looked upon kindly.


The spirit of the law means nothing. The Rules state "warp off grid", so until CCP alters this statement I see no clear proof of law stating that a ban is justifiable for this act of violence.


This is incorrect, we act on the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law. Tread that line at your own risk.


Which means there is no line what so ever. It means you basically rule through complete arbitrariness. I'm sorry but that doesn't exactly feel right to me. "You" write the rules. So write them.

http://www.iggepsrealm.com - the ramblings of a spaceship driving techophile
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#71 - 2012-03-30 18:18:45 UTC
Welsige wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:
that may or may not be more or less strict.


Wut? Pirate

lol ;)


You're only gonna get one shot from now on, so don't miss and bring some friends.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#72 - 2012-03-30 18:19:24 UTC  |  Edited by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
And yet dec scraping is still perfectly acceptable.

Sigh.

edit: I also find the wording of that post rather dishonest. "We would like to remind you of the following information from Customer Support:" indicates that it's old information and that we need REMINDING. The truth is, this is a new rule crafted to stop the boomerang maneuver that has been so well-used recently. You should really change the post to reflect that this is a NEW ruling.

I object to how this was handled, but at this point it's probably pointless to argue the ruling.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#73 - 2012-03-30 18:22:16 UTC
PriorofDeath wrote:
The spirit of the law means nothing. The Rules state "warp off grid", so until CCP alters this statement I see no clear proof of law stating that a ban is justifiable for this act of violence.

Last I heard regarding hi-sec shenanigans was that anything trying to or succeeding at avoiding Concord gets hammered .. statement is from a couple of years ago when Cocnord were last buffed. Doubt the "rules" have changed in the meantime.

The notice given is an excessive courtesy (if such a thing exists) if you ask me Big smile
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2012-03-30 18:30:10 UTC
Alta Hibra wrote:
Stop whining. When a single tornado with a bumping alt can kill a freighter in high sec something is obviously broken.
the entitlement of highsec bears to autopilot freighters with zero backup or thought for defense is the problem

a single alt in an assault frig (or a falcon) could save the bear's freighter from a tornado
R0ot
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#75 - 2012-03-30 19:00:05 UTC
Simple fix, if you GCC your warp drive get's disabled.
Jim Luc
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#76 - 2012-03-30 19:06:40 UTC
So wait, it's not part of the game to run away from the cops??? I would think that would be a fun game mechanic, to evade the law, how is this an exploit?? I'm not a pirate by any means but my BS meter is all the way up on this one CCP... Ugh
Prince Kobol
#77 - 2012-03-30 19:08:35 UTC
Jim Luc wrote:
So wait, it's not part of the game to run away from the cops??? I would think that would be a fun game mechanic, to evade the law, how is this an exploit?? I'm not a pirate by any means but my BS meter is all the way up on this one CCP... Ugh


As far as I am aware it has been deemed an exploit to try and escape concord for like nearly forever
Katarina Reid
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#78 - 2012-03-30 19:14:38 UTC
Warping around loads of times killing with concord chasing u is not good. Warping off and then back to a freighter to solo it is not good. U should be able to warp out and gank something tho. Concord take 10 sec's to get there so there is easily time to warp out before they spawn but concord should get increasing warp speed and increasing agilty for every second they dont get you. It should be legit to warp out and kill one more target cuz concord hasent spawned by the time u first warp.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#79 - 2012-03-30 19:15:09 UTC
Simple Fix... remove CONCORD, most anti Sandbox feature of EVE. Or bring them down to Sleeper/Incursions RAT levels and remove all these silly rules about avoiding them.
Sentinel Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2012-03-30 19:16:20 UTC
Two fixes..

While under a GCC, at least in highsec, you should be unable to leave your ship, or use a fitting service.. Or better yet, any it would work for low too, while under a GCC, if you use a fitting service, pending the Orca Pilots approval, will give them a GCC too [ probably not the sec hit.. but still make them a concord target in highsec, and a valid target without sec hit in low ]. Aiding the enemy of concord.. Likewise flag the ship and user.. So even if I enter a ship that someone used for a gank, it's still gonna go boom, cause IT was flagged.

The other part is sure, you should be able to enter warp, get to your safe.. But the instant you exit warp, regardless of normal response time for system, the second you come out, concord will be there, and you will be scrammed and jammed.