These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Goons 4x4ing through the Sandbox - Market Manipulation on a Grand Scale

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#1061 - 2012-06-22 12:44:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Constantine
Tallian Saotome wrote:
The LP for dropped item was a bug, it was reported and almost immediately fixed. And yes, you are allowed to test a bug as 'Proof of concept' before reporting it, as long as you are not going out of your way to exploit it. You are even allowed to gain an advantage during the process of proving it, but this is the ONE place in the entire scheme that might be sketchy.


Aryth wrote:
(from the op) The test quickly became even bigger than anticipated because upon release, FW turned out to have a bug that rewarded LP for both dropped and exploded cargo, doubling the rewards. So we went to work, sending hundreds of billions of ISK worth of highend minerals to Yulai to be blown up. Why Yulai? Anyone enlisted in faction warfare gets shot at by faction police of the opposing factions. Yulai and its entire constellation are owned by CONCORD, which is neutral territory. Thus, both FW alts could move through peacefully. Also, Yulai has an “Inner Circle” station, which was just plain funny. How fitting that Yulai, once the most important system in Eve, finally becomes relevant again.
CCP reacted quickly and patched this out, but the damage was done (not that it really mattered since it would merely have delayed the inevitable); the cabal had our “seed” LP.


This quote from the op makes it pretty clear that there was a bug that "doubled the rewards" and though CCP patched the bug out "the damage was done" and the cabal had the "seed LP" for the scheme.

I guess there is a question (that only CCP can answer in their internal enquiry) of whether this bug was reported by the op at the time it was being used to gain the seed LP for the ongoing project.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Ciar Meara
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1062 - 2012-06-22 12:45:14 UTC
Mac Zehn wrote:
we are the goldman sache of eve


Some kind of sack anyway, but well played sirs, well played.

- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1063 - 2012-06-22 12:45:50 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
This quote from the op makes it pretty clear that there was a bug that "doubled the rewards" and though CCP patched the bug out "the damage was done" and the cabal had the "seed LP" for the scheme.

I guess there is a question (that only CCP can answer in their internal enquiry) of whether this bug was reported by the op at the time it was being used to gain the seed LP for the ongoing project.

I guess you're not going to tell us how we can convert LP directly into ISK, thus spawning ISK out of thin air, are you?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Mabego Tetrimon
Spiritus Draconis
#1064 - 2012-06-22 12:46:50 UTC
Vokanicq wrote:

In fact a macro would need a delay programmed into it, otherwise half your clicks, and half your 'enter's would miss their intended place in the process. It simply removes the risk of RSI in that case


i dont care if it takes away risk or take even more time to use a macro to aquire that kind of items from the LP Store. Its irrelevant.

Whats relevant is, that using the macro for that breaks the Eula.
Alexzandvar Douglass
Motiveless Malignity
Deepwater Hooligans
#1065 - 2012-06-22 12:48:19 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
This quote from the op makes it pretty clear that there was a bug that "doubled the rewards" and though CCP patched the bug out "the damage was done" and the cabal had the "seed LP" for the scheme.

I guess there is a question (that only CCP can answer in their internal enquiry) of whether this bug was reported by the op at the time it was being used to gain the seed LP for the ongoing project.

I guess you're not going to tell us how we can convert LP directly into ISK, thus spawning ISK out of thin air, are you?


Wow, 50 pages and you guys are still going at it. Feel free to continue, this takes the edge off the bordem of Ice Mining.
Dasrufken
Nova Ardour
#1066 - 2012-06-22 12:48:54 UTC
As much as I hate to admit it, you goons are actually pretty ******* awesome for doing something like this as regularly as you do.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1067 - 2012-06-22 12:49:11 UTC
Mabego Tetrimon wrote:
Vokanicq wrote:

In fact a macro would need a delay programmed into it, otherwise half your clicks, and half your 'enter's would miss their intended place in the process. It simply removes the risk of RSI in that case


i dont care if it takes away risk or take even more time to use a macro to aquire that kind of items from the LP Store. Its irrelevant.

Whats relevant is, that using the macro for that breaks the Eula.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=76689

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#1068 - 2012-06-22 12:50:33 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
That means you guys were amongst the last to know ... thats actually quite funny.

I'm actually 100% certain you're 100% full of ****. But again, please do keep on pouring on the damage control, you're pretty bad at it.


https://twitter.com/EVEAryth/status/215233678631116801

any comments?

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Mabego Tetrimon
Spiritus Draconis
#1069 - 2012-06-22 12:51:20 UTC
Alexzandvar Douglass wrote:
Goons do something that makes people angry. People get Angry. People demand Bans. Goons Troll those people. Cycle continues until end of time or the thread is locked.


Only that their doings have the ability to break the FW-LP-items market for a looooong time, and in consequence breaks the new FW all together.

Thats why i rage. I like the new FW features a lot from a simple gamer point of view. And i dont want it to get broken by some pubbies who manipulated the market, broke the Eula and claim respect for winning a war they did not do a iota for.
Fenella
Dangermouse Inc.
#1070 - 2012-06-22 12:52:42 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
I guess you're not going to tell us how we can convert LP directly into ISK, thus spawning ISK out of thin air, are you?


Give it a rest...

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein, (attributed)
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1071 - 2012-06-22 12:53:01 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
That means you guys were amongst the last to know ... thats actually quite funny.

I'm actually 100% certain you're 100% full of ****. But again, please do keep on pouring on the damage control, you're pretty bad at it.


https://twitter.com/EVEAryth/status/215233678631116801

any comments?

Yes, Aryth is bad at twitter and leaked it inadvertedly. So you weren't full of **** when it came to the document, and I was wrong.

Now, about that spawning ISK from thin air through converting LPs, again?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Amarr Ian
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1072 - 2012-06-22 12:53:10 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Amarr Ian wrote:
It doesn't matter how much isk he has. Its the fact of the massive post for an epic fail.

Tell us more about this ... "epic fail".



Just re-read the first post in this thread Roll
Vokanic
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1073 - 2012-06-22 12:53:53 UTC
Mabego Tetrimon wrote:
Vokanicq wrote:

In fact a macro would need a delay programmed into it, otherwise half your clicks, and half your 'enter's would miss their intended place in the process. It simply removes the risk of RSI in that case


i dont care if it takes away risk or take even more time to use a macro to aquire that kind of items from the LP Store. Its irrelevant.

Whats relevant is, that using the macro for that breaks the Eula.


You do know that the rule you were quoting does specifically say if it speeds up acquisition? It is therefore perfectly legal for me to use a macro, if its slower then what I can manually click.

I can spend an hour manually collecting my 100 implants, or set a macro overnight and have it take 8 hours, very slowly. It takes longer then normal gameplay, I still get the implants, and its totally within the rules.
Mabego Tetrimon
Spiritus Draconis
#1074 - 2012-06-22 12:54:16 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

i dont care if it takes away risk or take even more time to use a macro to aquire that kind of items from the LP Store. Its irrelevant.

Whats relevant is, that using the macro for that breaks the Eula.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=76689[/quote]

ya really bad at propaganda----sigh

so? Where is the Dev post that says: "Using Macro to acquire large stacks of items you otherwise need 14 hours of clicking for is allowed?"
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1075 - 2012-06-22 12:55:19 UTC
Amarr Ian wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Amarr Ian wrote:
It doesn't matter how much isk he has. Its the fact of the massive post for an epic fail.

Tell us more about this ... "epic fail".



Just re-read the first post in this thread Roll

I'm not understanding what the "epic fail" is there. Please elucidate.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#1076 - 2012-06-22 12:56:40 UTC
Well best GM reply I could find.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=889308#post889308

Quote:
GM Lelouch wrote:

Hello there,

To make a long story short, automation of gameplay is not permitted; players must be manually issuing the commands to control their character(s) at all times.

Our stance on programs such as Synergy and hardware/software combination such as the G15 keyboard is that they can be legitimately used as long as gameplay isn't automated. Synergy allows you to move your mouse cursor to multiple different monitors which are hooked up to different computers and we do not have any qualms with players using the program for this purpose. If Synergy was used in some way to control your accounts for you without a need for you to be at your keyboard, then that would not be allowed, but I am not aware of such a functionality with this program. If Synergy is used in conjunction with some other program to automate gameplay, it would not be permitted. G15 "macros" which allow you to group different commands into one keypress are allowed. For example, setting your G1 key to press F1, F2, F3 and so on for you with one key press is allowed (although this specific command is not as useful as it was before now that we have weapon grouping).

An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!

Lastly, multiboxing is allowed, and programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed. In the same vein as what has been stated above, the player must be manually sending the commands; if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA.

I hope this clears up this matter.

Best regards,
Senior GM Lelouch
EVE Online Customer Support


Its not really a perfect judgement because obviously automating a mouse click followed by a "enter" is not really complex - but it is automating a process that would not require you to be at your keyboard for 14 hours.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Oisin Sandovar
Don't Die Interstellar Enterprises
#1077 - 2012-06-22 12:57:54 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Mabego Tetrimon wrote:
Vokanicq wrote:

In fact a macro would need a delay programmed into it, otherwise half your clicks, and half your 'enter's would miss their intended place in the process. It simply removes the risk of RSI in that case


i dont care if it takes away risk or take even more time to use a macro to aquire that kind of items from the LP Store. Its irrelevant.

Whats relevant is, that using the macro for that breaks the Eula.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=76689

And Goons complain of AFK mining. I mean really, are you playing the game? Blink

"And the only people I fear are those who never have doubts", Billy Joel, Shades of Grey
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1078 - 2012-06-22 12:58:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Aryth wrote:
Nikodiemus wrote:
The Goons were not really the first to think of this... It was a pretty obvious exploit for people that trade or deal with the market a lot. Thing is, manipulating game mechanics is different than manipulating the market and is bad mmkay? Ruins the games longevity. Props for actually taking the initiative and doing the work to pull it off though. Hope CCP remedies your gains though.

I would love CCP Dr. EyjoG to do a write up on this at some point.... or just hear his comments during the next fanfest. ^.^


We were the only ones to report it from what we can tell. So I think that bears remembering.


You did not report the other pseudo-exploit that can still be done as I write...
I found out about it yesterday about 1 hour before this thread was posted. I suppose CCP's code has multiple vulnerabilities...


We have reported several variations. There are indeed multiple ways to take advantage of this. I can only assume CCP will redo some of the mechanics to catch all variations.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#1079 - 2012-06-22 12:58:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Talon SilverHawk
Lapine Davion wrote:

So your argument is dead then? Were you just ~*tHe PuPpEtMaStAh*~ the whole time?


Nope still valid IME, I've answered the questions, if you don't understand the simple premise, or more likely don't have the same view point, then nothing I will say will change that.


Lets agree to disagree.

Tal
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1080 - 2012-06-22 12:58:45 UTC
Mabego Tetrimon wrote:
so? Where is the Dev post that says: "Using Macro to acquire large stacks of items you otherwise need 14 hours of clicking for is allowed?"

I guess you didn't scroll down and read the quote, then, because it outlines precisely what is and isn't allowed?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat