EVE General Discussion

The isk came from other players, genius. Its not new isk in the system, as a matter of fact(as has been stated repeatedly) they REMOVED a considerable amount of isk from the game, to the tune of a few hundred billion.

They made all of us ever so slightly richer, because all our isk is now worth slightly more.

Here ya go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C1x71fSt2s

AAA Citizens

Okay let's break this down.

Manipulating the market value of an item isn't against the rules, right? Right.
Allowing your ship to be blown up and destroyed isn't against the rules, right? Right.
Receiving LP based on amount of isk destroyed relative to others isn't against the rules, right? Right. Those are the rules.

At best, you can accuse Aryth of using badly designed game mechanics in a fashion that is completely within the rules but against what the game designer's intent was. CCP has the right to change the game mechanics to be more in line with what their original intent was. But that doesn't mean Aryth was breaking the rules or using an 'exploit'.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1516782#post1516782




Learn to edit.

I'm actually going to talk to you like an adult here, so lets hope it works.

The difference between an exploit and an unintended and undesirable use of game mechanics is that an exploit allows you, through various methods, to break a rule of the game. I will use an example from another game: Alpha Centauri, a great game, had a bug where if you gave the keyboard command for an airdrop, it would only let you do one per turn (as intended). If you used the mouse command, you could do as many as you wanted. That's an exploit, despite you doing nothing really wrong (hell many people who only used the mouse were unaware this limit was supposed to be there).

On the other hand, a perfectly intended use of game mechanics - self-destructing missiles with a fusion or greater reactor - is incredibly overpowered and lets you wipe out stacks of units in a way that wasn't really thought though well. No part of it breaks the rules - it does damage to all surrounding units, just as intended - but it's really overpowered and something you patch out or make a house rule against.

The key reason this is not an exploit is no rules were broken. The system functioned exactly as it was supposed to. Manipulating the price of an item is and always has been allowed (and is commonly used for margin scamming, or convincing people to sell stuff at a reduced price or buy it at an inflated price). Blowing up your own stuff to collect the proceeds is and always has been allowed. The issue is that once you combine the two, you get a situation that breaks no rule, but is highly undesirable (the generation of LP at a very low isk cost). If the mechanism allowed you to generate LP for free, there would be an argument it's breaking a rule of the game. But it didn't: every LP point you got cost you a specific amount of isk.

Since this is undesirable, the devs will naturally patch it out. But because it was perfectly legitimate when done, it's clearly not something that people should be punished for. When it comes to confiscating the products of the scheme, I think it's clear that shouldn't be done as well - it would be an unfair punishment - unless the amounts generated were so vast the health of the game demanded it. That's a factual question that we can disagree over, but from my understanding of the market this is not a gamebreaking amount. For the vast majority of the time when these five were dumping, implant prices weren't artificially low: they merely were at their historical average instead of the spiked post-inferno price. This is a lot of money for these involved - sadly, I am not one of them and must be content with my vast guidance system riches - but it's not an amount that will seriously affect markets or devalue LP.

The part where it states you can't use the legal game mechanics in a way to give you unintended gains over other players.

That part.

We'll see what CCP says over what exactly was intended, but based on what they've said already it's not looking good for your side of the argument.

Until then, your side will continue to insist it's legitimacy pointing out how different it is from other exploits while at the same time insisting CCP won't take the stuff back because of how they handled other exploits that were like theirs. I mean completely different from theirs. Or something.

Boy, I sure hope someone at CCP doesn't come along and make you "less smug".

I think you need to read better.

Tell us more about how loyalty points can be turned into isk from thin air.