These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Aliaksandre
Screaming Hayabusa
#1321 - 2012-06-22 18:09:27 UTC
So awesome. All of it.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1322 - 2012-06-22 18:11:03 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Are there bugs that are not usage of game mechanics?

It was working as designed. Not working as designed would be a bug, this wasn't a bug.

Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
I doubt it was a knee jerk reaction. It was a follow up to a public company statement about a security investigation, probably had several CCP staff review it, stamp it. Dignitaries of dignitaries and that sort of thing. It's all rather complicated.

They do that type of thing all the time for legit gameplay.

Oh, you know how CCP works now?

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

RIP Vile Rat

Preceptor Stigmartyr
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1323 - 2012-06-22 18:12:47 UTC
Better Than You wrote:
Thanks for ruining the FW and the LP market you attention starved jerks! About time you shove off and ruin a different game don't you think?! I look forward to your bans for exploiting game mechanics and will be here drinking in the oceans of tears from your fellow alliance mates crying about how their buddy was given the kick to the curb.

-2 accounts till goons are removed from the game. They say they bring content, but it is in fact a complete load of bullshit.


Pirate COOL STORY BRO.






TELL IT AGAIN.

**4/19 **NEVER FORGET ಠ_ಠ

Drazn
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1324 - 2012-06-22 18:15:15 UTC
Here is when the Ban hammer comes crashing down.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#1325 - 2012-06-22 18:16:14 UTC
Pisov viet wrote:
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Not an exploit?
23.You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.

What do you think, CCP?

It wasnt a bug.

OK, not a bug. If we define a bug as a technical glitch, rather than an exploitable feature of the rules/game design. I believe CCP has considered some non-'bug' things as exploits before, no? In any event, the intent and purpose of the TOS provision is apparent from its language. Exploit... to gain an unfair advantage over other players.
And then, in a separate issue, You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum.
In any event, it's a manipulation of the game system to achieve an unintended result, of a pretty massive scale. Looks, walks and smells like an exploit to me.
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1326 - 2012-06-22 18:16:45 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Are there bugs that are not usage of game mechanics?

It was working as designed. Not working as designed would be a bug, this wasn't a bug.


Unfortunately the focus isn't on working as designed, it's working as intended. Intended being the same word the EULA uses.

Lord Zim wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
I doubt it was a knee jerk reaction. It was a follow up to a public company statement about a security investigation, probably had several CCP staff review it, stamp it. Dignitaries of dignitaries and that sort of thing. It's all rather complicated.

They do that type of thing all the time for legit gameplay.

Oh, you know how CCP works now?


oh yeah, i got all the inside infos. goons got nothing on my irc channels

Tallian Saotome wrote:

The tracking bug in wormholes. That was a bug, not a mechanic. You should learn the difference before you open your mouth about the issue.


5 points House Slytherin.

And I didn't open my mouth.. I opened my keyboard. Or was it my modem? Points redacted.
Carlos Aranda
Doomheim
#1327 - 2012-06-22 18:17:33 UTC
Pisov viet wrote:

The only people I've seen use the word abuse are goon haters and people supporting their argument. Checkmate, atheist.


The only people I've seen, who say all legit within the sandbox are goon lovers and people supporting their argument. Checkmate, atheist.

It is not so easy, you know ... but maybe too hard to understand for you.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#1328 - 2012-06-22 18:18:03 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
I bolded your poorly-considered confessions for you.

It sort of looks like a whole faction was complaining and you admitted to making billions off their woes to me, Hans.

And it also looks like you're glad the Goons were manipulating the system, because now you seem to think you're justified in ignoring your oppositions' complaints.

[sarcasm]Higher standards could not be had![/sarcasm]


You're absolutely right, other Minmatar certainly cashed out quite nicely during this spike, I however missed the boat. Last Saturday was the first time I'd sat down to grind LP, and ironically missed the big window LolAlso, the Amarr have outright said they are plexing using Minmatar alts, so my enemies cashed out during this spike as well.

As for my opposition's complaints, they were never ignored. The two biggest warnings I gave CCP prior to Inferno release were to not go with full station lockout, and to not have extreme LP scaling. These are also the two biggest concerns that my enemy's had, and continue to have. At the recent summit, I once again asked for station docking to be moved to a system upgrade, not a permanent feature. With the Goon exploit coming to light, now the developers can see what I warned them about - that maybe this extreme LP scaling might have unforseen consequences.

What I've ignored since inferno's release, is the idea that Faction Warfare is somehow "destroyed" and that the Amarr situation is "hopeless". Everyone who argued against dockblocking (including myself) said it would kill the activity level throughout the warzone. The opposite has occured. I have a responsibility to argue for changes based on the *consequences* observed on Tranquility, and not to stick to rhetoric that crumbles under current events suggesting otherwise. Many Amarr claimed station lockout would make seizing systems impossible, that also turned out not to be true.

It is only the doomsday predictions that have been thoroughly debunked since Inferno's release that I have ignored, I continue to pass on legitimate feedback to CCP on a regular basis. I am relieved that the market manipulation has ended not because my enemies have *nothing* legitimate to complain about, I am relieved that there is now a much more accurate picture of the war being documented so that everyone, friend and foe alike, can see whether or not things are as "hopeless" as some Amarr claim.

If the mechanics are balanced enough to allow for a comeback despite the lack of Goon warzone control backing, we're in good shape. If the war continues to stagnate and remains one-sided, than my warnings to CCP about imbalance will be vindicated and maybe they'll listen to me in the future on these issues instead of saying "EVE isn't fair" and releasing the system as they saw fit.

First, I have to emphasize that this is not personal. You are a representative and therefore subject to scrutiny.

Second, I'd say this is pretty doomsday and went on for long enough that you should have reacted to the needs of your constituency. Instead, according to Goon accounts, Minmatar FW as a whole did a bunch of back-patting when Tier 5 was reached in nearly every system. You had to know that was impossible. Further, you were obligated to listen to your opposition, who were obviously saying that something was wrong - a snowball effect.

Finally, I wish you good luck in damage control, spinning this as favorably as possible, and in general doing a better job of separating your two roles in Eve Online.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Dramaticus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1329 - 2012-06-22 18:20:17 UTC
Item's CCP calculated value rises due to market forces: Working as intended
LP is offered for faction warfare kills: Working as intended
LP is redeemed for items: Working as intended

ehlp

The 'do-nothing' member of the GoonSwarm Economic Warfare Cabal

The edge is REALLY hard to see at times but it DOES exist and in this case we were looking at a situation where a new feature created for all of our customers was being virtually curbstomped by five of them

Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#1330 - 2012-06-22 18:20:36 UTC
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Pisov viet wrote:
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Not an exploit?
23.You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.

What do you think, CCP?

It wasnt a bug.

OK, not a bug. If we define a bug as a technical glitch, rather than an exploitable feature of the rules/game design. I believe CCP has considered some non-'bug' things as exploits before, no? In any event, the intent and purpose of the TOS provision is apparent from its language. Exploit... to gain an unfair advantage over other players.
And then, in a separate issue, You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum.
In any event, it's a manipulation of the game system to achieve an unintended result, of a pretty massive scale. Looks, walks and smells like an exploit to me.

Its not an exploit til CCP declares it so, and you can't be punished for it if its not an exploit. After they declare it so(I would consider Sreegs' post a declaration that it is so) any further use of said exploit because punishable.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#1331 - 2012-06-22 18:20:47 UTC
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Pisov viet wrote:
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Not an exploit?
23.You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.

What do you think, CCP?

It wasnt a bug.

OK, not a bug. If we define a bug as a technical glitch, rather than an exploitable feature of the rules/game design. I believe CCP has considered some non-'bug' things as exploits before, no? In any event, the intent and purpose of the TOS provision is apparent from its language. Exploit... to gain an unfair advantage over other players.
And then, in a separate issue, You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum.
In any event, it's a manipulation of the game system to achieve an unintended result, of a pretty massive scale. Looks, walks and smells like an exploit to me.

One time CCP called an entire advertised feature a bug, then an exploit. They ninja-edited all the advertising proaganda regarding it and named it Ghost Training.

So yeah, CCP will do what they want. Shocked

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1332 - 2012-06-22 18:21:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Unfortunately the focus isn't on working as designed, it's working as intended. Intended being the same word the EULA uses.

Were BOB banned for POS bowling? Were NCdot, Raidendot, ev0ke and PL banned for using a feature "not as intended" (i.e. tracking titans to blap subcaps) to get access to tech? Were hisec pubbies banned for abusing neutral logistics? Were anyone banned for abusing the wardec mechanics by dogpiling on each and every public war?

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

RIP Vile Rat

Pisov viet
Perkone
Caldari State
#1333 - 2012-06-22 18:21:52 UTC
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Pisov viet wrote:
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Not an exploit?
23.You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.

What do you think, CCP?

It wasnt a bug.

OK, not a bug. If we define a bug as a technical glitch, rather than an exploitable feature of the rules/game design. I believe CCP has considered some non-'bug' things as exploits before, no? In any event, the intent and purpose of the TOS provision is apparent from its language. Exploit... to gain an unfair advantage over other players.
And then, in a separate issue, You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum.
In any event, it's a manipulation of the game system to achieve an unintended result, of a pretty massive scale. Looks, walks and smells like an exploit to me.

You should quote that TOS part completely:
Quote:
You may not exploit any bug in EVE Online to gain an unfair advantage over other players. You may not communicate the existence of any exploitable bug to others directly or through a public forum. Bugs should be reported through the bug reporting tool on our website.

The important part is "bug". This relate to exploiting "bugs". Poorly designed mechanism are not bugs.
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1334 - 2012-06-22 18:21:58 UTC
Dramaticus wrote:
Item's CCP calculated value rises due to market forces: Working as intended
LP is offered for faction warfare kills: Working as intended
LP is redeemed for items: Working as intended

ehlp


goons go in, LP comes out. its easy

obviously not an exploit
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#1335 - 2012-06-22 18:22:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia
Lord Zim wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Unfortunately the focus isn't on working as designed, it's working as intended. Intended being the same word the EULA uses.

Were BOB banned for POS bowling? Were NCdot, Raidendot, ev0ke and PL banned for using a feature "not as intended" (i.e. tracking titans to blap subcaps) to get access to tech? Were hisec pubbies banned for abusing neutral logistics? Were anyone banned for abusing the wardec mechanics by dogpiling on each and every public war?


I never said anything about banning anyone. But do continue with whatever you are saying.

edit: can you get your A team guys out here? this B team stuff is just getting lazy
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#1336 - 2012-06-22 18:22:52 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Its not an exploit til CCP declares it so, and you can't be punished for it if its not an exploit. After they declare it so(I would consider Sreegs' post a declaration that it is so) any further use of said exploit because punishable.

Funny, I read sreegs' post as "We're investigating and deciding whether we will let this stand or not, and in the meantime don't do it anymore."

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1337 - 2012-06-22 18:23:58 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Unfortunately the focus isn't on working as designed, it's working as intended. Intended being the same word the EULA uses.

Were BOB banned for POS bowling? Were NCdot, Raidendot, ev0ke and PL banned for using a feature "not as intended" (i.e. tracking titans to blap subcaps) to get access to tech? Were hisec pubbies banned for abusing neutral logistics? Were anyone banned for abusing the wardec mechanics by dogpiling on each and every public war?


I never said anything about banning anyone. But do continue with whatever you are saying.

Were any of them reacted against in any, way or form?

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

RIP Vile Rat

Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#1338 - 2012-06-22 18:24:45 UTC
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Dramaticus wrote:
Item's CCP calculated value rises due to market forces: Working as intended
LP is offered for faction warfare kills: Working as intended
LP is redeemed for items: Working as intended

ehlp


goons go in, LP comes out. its easy

obviously not an exploit

I wouldn't be an exploit if you had done it either. This seems to be the point your tinfoil hat is hiding from you.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#1339 - 2012-06-22 18:25:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
Unfortunately the focus isn't on working as designed, it's working as intended. Intended being the same word the EULA uses.

Were BOB banned for POS bowling? Were NCdot, Raidendot, ev0ke and PL banned for using a feature "not as intended" (i.e. tracking titans to blap subcaps) to get access to tech? Were hisec pubbies banned for abusing neutral logistics? Were anyone banned for abusing the wardec mechanics by dogpiling on each and every public war?


I never said anything about banning anyone. But do continue with whatever you are saying.

edit: can you get your A team guys out here? this B team stuff is just getting lazy

Please explain the difference between a feature working as designed and a feature working as intended.

I feel that they are virtually synonymous in this context, regardless of their respective denotative distinctiveness.

I eagerly await an explanation of how a system can be designed specifically to achieve different results than intended. Roll

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1340 - 2012-06-22 18:25:54 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Its not an exploit til CCP declares it so, and you can't be punished for it if its not an exploit. After they declare it so(I would consider Sreegs' post a declaration that it is so) any further use of said exploit because punishable.

Funny, I read sreegs' post as "We're investigating and deciding whether we will let this stand or not, and in the meantime don't do it anymore."


This is also how I read it. CCP has to ensure that the sandbox remains healthy. Hence all action must cease until they have time to evaluate the situation. It boils down to scale. 5T, isn't very big given hundreds of billions a day in those markets. But say, if it had been 50? The consequences would have been too long term.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.