These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 time to fix the orca exploit
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#101 - 2012-05-31 00:45:59 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Fiddler Hays wrote:
I think the boggle is i find your posts on this issue to be very narrow. Shallow? Trite? I feel something is not is as intend with regards to hi-sec. You seem to feel the opposite and point to some lack of effort on my part to conform. I dissagree. Good day to you.

CCP has repeatedly stated that Player Run Events are great and that Suicide Ganking is a valid game mechanic.

How is something in regards to HAG and HS not working as intended?

You're not supposed to die in highsec ~~~~

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 ?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#102 - 2012-05-31 01:00:07 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Fiddler Hays wrote:
I think the boggle is i find your posts on this issue to be very narrow. Shallow? Trite? I feel something is not is as intend with regards to hi-sec. You seem to feel the opposite and point to some lack of effort on my part to conform. I dissagree. Good day to you.

CCP has repeatedly stated that Player Run Events are great and that Suicide Ganking is a valid game mechanic.

How is something in regards to HAG and HS not working as intended?

You're not supposed to die in highsec ~~~~


That's right. I forgot. Miners are special snowflakes and need to be handled with the care and tenderness that fine china deserves.

I forgot myself. Nerf Suicide Ganking indeed.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#103 - 2012-05-31 01:04:28 UTC
Henry Haphorn wrote:
CCP designed the orca for support roles in high sec.


Your blanket statement has some truth to it. The Orca was specifically created to be a diet version of the Rorqual. There is even a CCP video of them specifically saying this.

On a personal note I have no issues with the Orca being able to transport combat ships.
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#104 - 2012-05-31 01:13:49 UTC
NickyYo wrote:
SlapNuts wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
Want to kill Burn Jita and Hulkageddon?

IdeaIt's simple!! Fix the Orca so it cannot jettison ships in space for -10 status pirates to jump into from their pods..

This has got me thinking, you can easily fix this exploit BUT do you want to?



WHo said this is an exploit?


I did!
Orca is meant for mining not killing miners..


Ignorant poster is ignorant for willingly ignoring the fact that the orca is not a mining ship. It's an industrial command ship meant to assist in a variety of roles. It is even capable of combat against battlecruisers when fitted and piloted properly.

Adapt or Die
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#105 - 2012-05-31 01:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Henry Haphorn wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
SlapNuts wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
Want to kill Burn Jita and Hulkageddon?

IdeaIt's simple!! Fix the Orca so it cannot jettison ships in space for -10 status pirates to jump into from their pods..

This has got me thinking, you can easily fix this exploit BUT do you want to?



WHo said this is an exploit?


I did!
Orca is meant for mining not killing miners..


Ignorant poster is ignorant for willingly ignoring the fact that the orca is not a mining ship. It's an industrial command ship meant to assist in a variety of roles. It is even capable of combat against battlecruisers when fitted and piloted properly.


Also, so far as I know, No Orca has ever been used in a suicide gank. Their alpha/dps is atrocious for their price.

I really hope someone proves me wrong. I will laugh mightily.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#106 - 2012-05-31 01:26:01 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Henry Haphorn wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
SlapNuts wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
Want to kill Burn Jita and Hulkageddon?

IdeaIt's simple!! Fix the Orca so it cannot jettison ships in space for -10 status pirates to jump into from their pods..

This has got me thinking, you can easily fix this exploit BUT do you want to?



WHo said this is an exploit?


I did!
Orca is meant for mining not killing miners..


Ignorant poster is ignorant for willingly ignoring the fact that the orca is not a mining ship. It's an industrial command ship meant to assist in a variety of roles. It is even capable of combat against battlecruisers when fitted and piloted properly.


Also, so far as I know, No Orca has ever been used in a suicide gank. Their alpha/dps is atrocious for their price.

I really hope someone proves me wrong. I will laugh mightily.


Such laughter will be heard for centuries.

Adapt or Die
Fiddler Hays
Aerodyne Collective.
#107 - 2012-05-31 01:35:40 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Fiddler Hays wrote:


I think the boggle is i find your posts on this issue to be very narrow. Shallow? Trite? I feel something is not is as intend with regards to hi-sec. You seem to feel the opposite and point to some lack of effort on my part to conform. I dissagree. Good day to you.



CCP has repeatedly stated that Player Run Events are great and that Suicide Ganking is a valid game mechanic.

How is something in regards to HAG and HS not working as intended?


Never said I had an issue with ganking in hi-sec. Never said I had an issue with Player Run Events.

If I had to say what seems wrong, it would be how security status is handled. You say we have our consequences as CONCORD will deal with any aggressive act once it happens. Thus, a person can be any security status and travel in hi-sec.

However, you ignore the whole reason CCP put ship restrictions on outlaws/criminals in hi-sec in the first place. To keep them out of a ship that could do harm.

So that being said, if CCP would just fix it so that you can never get into a ship in hi-sec if your security status says you shouldn't that would be more in line with their previous changes. No need to be podded by CONCORD.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#108 - 2012-05-31 01:51:57 UTC
Fiddler Hays wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Fiddler Hays wrote:


I think the boggle is i find your posts on this issue to be very narrow. Shallow? Trite? I feel something is not is as intend with regards to hi-sec. You seem to feel the opposite and point to some lack of effort on my part to conform. I dissagree. Good day to you.



CCP has repeatedly stated that Player Run Events are great and that Suicide Ganking is a valid game mechanic.

How is something in regards to HAG and HS not working as intended?


Never said I had an issue with ganking in hi-sec. Never said I had an issue with Player Run Events.

If I had to say what seems wrong, it would be how security status is handled. You say we have our consequences as CONCORD will deal with any aggressive act once it happens. Thus, a person can be any security status and travel in hi-sec.

However, you ignore the whole reason CCP put ship restrictions on outlaws/criminals in hi-sec in the first place. To keep them out of a ship that could do harm.

So that being said, if CCP would just fix it so that you can never get into a ship in hi-sec if your security status says you shouldn't that would be more in line with their previous changes. No need to be podded by CONCORD.




Nope. CCP has not put any restrictions on ships in HS. They only made the Police chase ebil criminals because that has a cool bit of realism. Also realistic is being able to run away from the police.

And there is no existing mechanic that bars anyone from boarding a ship that they can fly ('cept that ship being targeted). Adding such a mechanic is ridiculous.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Fiddler Hays
Aerodyne Collective.
#109 - 2012-05-31 02:11:57 UTC

Quote:
Nope. CCP has not put any restrictions on ships in HS. They only made the Police chase ebil criminals because that has a cool bit of realism. Also realistic is being able to run away from the police.


And yet avoiding CONCORD's consequences is a banning offense. Not sure I'm buying that.

Quote:
And there is no existing mechanic that bars anyone from boarding a ship that they can fly ('cept that ship being targeted). Adding such a mechanic is ridiculous.


There wasn't an existing mechanic to prevent you from tanking CONCORD at one point and yet CCP had to do that as well.

And with that I think we are at a agree to disagree point.

I can see where someone involved in PvP would not want to get locked out of a ship in hi-sec because of their security status. But I don't agree that that fits with what CCP has done in the past with hi-sec.

In my opinion, it is inconsistent to shoot on site a ship of an outlaw/criminal and yet let them pass when there are means for them to equip after passing CONCORD.

I know you disagree.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#110 - 2012-05-31 02:20:54 UTC
Fiddler Hays wrote:

Quote:
Nope. CCP has not put any restrictions on ships in HS. They only made the Police chase ebil criminals because that has a cool bit of realism. Also realistic is being able to run away from the police.


And yet avoiding CONCORD's consequences is a banning offense. Not sure I'm buying that.


Consequences. Not Restrictions. Anyway, if people are avoiding (not mitigating, avoiding) CONCORD's consequences for aggression, petition it; they'll get banned.

Quote:

Quote:
And there is no existing mechanic that bars anyone from boarding a ship that they can fly ('cept that ship being targeted). Adding such a mechanic is ridiculous.


There wasn't an existing mechanic to prevent you from tanking CONCORD at one point and yet CCP had to do that as well.

And with that I think we are at a agree to disagree point.

I can see where someone involved in PvP would not want to get locked out of a ship in hi-sec because of their security status. But I don't agree that that fits with what CCP has done in the past with hi-sec.

In my opinion, it is inconsistent to shoot on site a ship of an outlaw/criminal and yet let them pass when there are means for them to equip after passing CONCORD.

I know you disagree.


CCP in the past has made sure that there are consequences for aggression in HS. The original CONCORD buff was because CCP hadn't thought of that method of tanking when they started.

CCP has been very clear that Suicide Ganking, even at -10 is valid gameplay. If you're using the "CCP's changes to HS" argument, you will lose.

The insurance nerf was as much a nerf to suicide ganks as it was a way to reduce insurance as an isk faucet (hence the buff to ganking that occurred at the same time in the form of dessy buffs and the nado).

You're not evading CONCORD by flying a ship in HS (and you can just fly into HS from Low, you don't have to pod in), you're evading the Faction Police, which are intentionally weaker because the people they attack have not done something illegal yet.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Jayrendo Karr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#111 - 2012-05-31 02:24:29 UTC
A ship containing a ship that was used to gank should be destroyed by concord for being an accoplace to the crime.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#112 - 2012-05-31 02:28:23 UTC
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
A ship containing a ship that was used to gank should be destroyed by concord for being an accoplace to the crime.


Oooh, new way to grief mining corps. Join, ask their orca toon to bring your mining frig out to the belt -> get CONCORDED -> Orca Dies Lol

Glad to know you're thinking the consequences through.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2012-05-31 06:54:02 UTC
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
A ship containing a ship that was used to gank should be destroyed by concord for being an accoplace to the crime.


And the next against the wall will be the players that built the Orca, and the miners who supplied the minerals.
Roisin Saoirse
Doomheim
#114 - 2012-05-31 11:58:00 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
A ship containing a ship that was used to gank should be destroyed by concord for being an accoplace to the crime.


Oooh, new way to grief mining corps. Join, ask their orca toon to bring your mining frig out to the belt -> get CONCORDED -> Orca Dies Lol

Glad to know you're thinking the consequences through.

Maybe he's really trying to sneakily buff ganking and this is his cunning plan.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#115 - 2012-05-31 12:38:47 UTC
Roisin Saoirse wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
A ship containing a ship that was used to gank should be destroyed by concord for being an accoplace to the crime.


Oooh, new way to grief mining corps. Join, ask their orca toon to bring your mining frig out to the belt -> get CONCORDED -> Orca Dies Lol

Glad to know you're thinking the consequences through.

Maybe he's really trying to sneakily buff ganking and this is his cunning plan.


Possible, but I think stupid is more likely.

@Jayrendo, if you're looking for a stealth buff to HS awoxing, I love the plan.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#116 - 2012-05-31 12:51:49 UTC
Guys, concord, highsec, ganking blah blah, is fine!! it is what makes eve -> eve.

We are not saying remove all ganking or ship storage in the orca in highsec, we are saying revert ganking back to how it was for 7 years prior, where if you had -10 sec you had to gate camp in low sec and not continue to gank in highsec by exploiting the orcas ship bay.

Now with goons inifite hulkageddon announcement, i see this fix coming very, very soon!

..
c4 t
Cosmic Psychedelics
#117 - 2012-05-31 12:56:50 UTC
Go away nobody likes you.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#118 - 2012-05-31 13:00:03 UTC
NickyYo wrote:
Guys, concord, highsec, ganking blah blah, is fine!! it is what makes eve -> eve.

We are not saying remove all ganking or ship storage in the orca in highsec, we are saying revert ganking back to how it was for 7 years prior, where if you had -10 sec you had to gate camp in low sec and not continue to gank in highsec by exploiting the orcas ship bay.

Now with goons inifite hulkageddon announcement, i see this fix coming very, very soon!


The Orca came out in 2008, EvE started in 2003. From 2003 to 2005, Carriers were buildable in HS, giving the same ship pooping capabilities Orcas have.

There was about a 3 year span where there were no new ships with SMAs being built in HS, and those 3 years ended 4 years ago.

So you're saying revert to how it ~kinda~ was for three years out of Eve's 9 year history?

I think CONCORD was tankable for about that long, so why not revert to that as well?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
sweetrock
#119 - 2012-05-31 13:34:02 UTC
This is not an exploit just a game mechanic. A game mechanic which i actualy think is fair. Afterall all this QQ about miners wanting sp's back for wasted sp, and that indy skills cant merge over to pvp. This is a example of a ideal way to use your old mineing orca
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#120 - 2012-05-31 13:36:46 UTC
sweetrock wrote:
This is not an exploit just a game mechanic. A game mechanic which i actualy think is fair. Afterall all this QQ about miners wanting sp's back for wasted sp, and that indy skills cant merge over to pvp. This is a example of a ideal way to use your old mineing orca


Maybee so, but this is eve and tuff!
Alliances like goons and old greifer corps never had this problem back in the day, see my point?

Game rules need to change over time to cater for the new, back in the day new was the new.

..