EVE General Discussion

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

I also do not quite understand in general, what Goons do with their ISKs. We not know, how much money Goons really made out of FW shop manipulations. We do know exactly, they sit on a monopol of Tech. Surprisingly we do not see any of this ISK. Goons still fly the same crappy fleet set ups like a few months ago, while other alliances fly t3 and have still way more Supercapitals. Others also have of course ship reimbursement programs. In other words, the wealth does not reach the average Goon. Where is that money?

If CCP takes no action, then I believe that they are effectively stating that "End-Game" for the "Eve Financial Game" is looking for, and exploiting, loopholes in their complicated mechanics. Bugs, loopholes, and other shortcuts will always occur, so asking CCP not to release buggy software isn't a practical option.

If CCP takes no action, then I believe that they are effectively stating that "End-Game" for the "Eve Financial Game" is looking for, and exploiting, loopholes in their complicated mechanics.

Why would I do that when the full quote clearly doesn't make that claim. You are just being silly.

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.

That and this thread really makes a case to remove insurance from the game altogether, as quite a few have arued over in the past. If someone wants insurance let the corp deal with it via mechanism or free market parties. Then if you loose ship after ship in pointless ways, your fee would go trough the roof or you just get plain rejected.

It would probably have the majority of the 0.0 folk go like cry baby, but it would return meaning to pvp victory and loss! Lets see how bad-ass those peeps really are :)

That and this thread really makes a case to remove insurance from the game altogether, as quite a few have arued over in the past. If someone wants insurance let the corp deal with it via mechanism or free market parties. Then if you loose ship after ship in pointless ways, your fee would go trough the roof or you just get plain rejected.

It would probably have the majority of the 0.0 folk go like cry baby, but it would return meaning to pvp victory and loss! Lets see how bad-ass those peeps really are :)