These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

FW Gate
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#61 - 2012-06-24 23:16:52 UTC
Kiteo Hatto wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Or maybe listening to people when they point out massive, gaping holes in their product. After all, we're not here to watch Gonzo, we're here for spaceships.

Thing is, its not massive, gaping holes in the product if it requires hardcore spreadsheet action and only a couple of people actually go that far.

In your case CCP should have listened to the ui change too, even if only the minority can't stand it.


People pointed out that the LP gain from cargo would be abused through market manipulation long before it was spreadsheetable (or released).

"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
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#62 - 2012-06-24 23:45:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Frying Doom wrote:
Zagdul wrote:

Did people who used it have their assets seized without warning?


I think the Insurance nerf, the PI nerf and all the other nerfs on destroying your own stuff for profit were a pretty good warning.

And the POS bans and destruction were a good warning on not exploiting the game.

Don't you?


I think the loss of isk and assets was good warning

Talard Khardula wrote:
Fatbottom Girl wrote:
CCP Xhagen says. "Technically speaking, they were not doing anything that was forbidden

June 22, 2012 Never forget.

The death of the sandbox came as innocuously as it began. A group of enterprising individuals who examine patch notes and run spreadsheets and formulas found a way to get ahead of a poorly implemented feature on an upcoming patch. The Viking Gods of CCP hf saw fit to sacrifice innovation upon the altar of expediency.

Walls slammed into place and bars were erected. "You may go this far and no further," was the message. This bold and beautiful universe we live in became much smaller.

June 22, 2012 Never forget.



Whine, whine, whine some more. Your tears are delicious.


I put them on french fries via the company in my sig

Lexmana wrote:

Are you saying that exploiting a vulnerability should be legal up and until CCP says no?


Yes that is what theyve been saying lol

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#63 - 2012-06-24 23:49:13 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Kiteo Hatto wrote:
You are saying ccp needs to "goonproof" their patches while making everybody else wait ?


no, CCP should release content when it's finished, been tested, and is actually ready for deployment to live servers.


Yeah
wait look youre talking about O.o

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Dave stark
#64 - 2012-06-24 23:49:54 UTC
Kiteo Hatto wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Or maybe listening to people when they point out massive, gaping holes in their product. After all, we're not here to watch Gonzo, we're here for spaceships.

Thing is, its not massive, gaping holes in the product if it requires hardcore spreadsheet action and only a couple of people actually go that far.

In your case CCP should have listened to the ui change too, even if only the minority can't stand it.


FW having the potential to ruin the economy was pretty much fact.
the ui changes were a matter of personal taste.

i don't think you can really compare the two.
Dave stark
#65 - 2012-06-24 23:50:26 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Kiteo Hatto wrote:
You are saying ccp needs to "goonproof" their patches while making everybody else wait ?


no, CCP should release content when it's finished, been tested, and is actually ready for deployment to live servers.


Yeah
wait look youre talking about O.o


uh... what?
Frying Doom
#66 - 2012-06-25 00:00:11 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Zagdul wrote:

Did people who used it have their assets seized without warning?


I think the Insurance nerf, the PI nerf and all the other nerfs on destroying your own stuff for profit were a pretty good warning.

And the POS bans and destruction were a good warning on not exploiting the game.

Don't you?


I think the loss of isk and assets was good warning

The warnings for this kind of behavior, profiting from destroying your own stuff were warnings for anyone to see.

The precedent is there for how this kind of blatant use of a bug, The POS scam. Anything more is too harsh anything less is too soft. If CCP don't want to be accused of favoratism they simply need to follow the precedent set for players in the past.

Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Lexmana wrote:

Are you saying that exploiting a vulnerability should be legal up and until CCP says no?


Yes that is what theyve been saying lol

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#67 - 2012-06-25 00:02:43 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Kiteo Hatto wrote:
You are saying ccp needs to "goonproof" their patches while making everybody else wait ?


no, CCP should release content when it's finished, been tested, and is actually ready for deployment to live servers.


Yeah
wait look youre talking about O.o


uh... what?


Hell, I dont even remember anymore

Insanity can be annoying but sanity...
Isn't sanity just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean, all you get is that one trick--rational thinking--but when you're good and crazy, well, the sky's the limit!

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Dave stark
#68 - 2012-06-25 00:06:20 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Kiteo Hatto wrote:
You are saying ccp needs to "goonproof" their patches while making everybody else wait ?


no, CCP should release content when it's finished, been tested, and is actually ready for deployment to live servers.


Yeah
wait look youre talking about O.o


uh... what?


Hell, I dont even remember anymore

Insanity can be annoying but sanity...
Isn't sanity just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean, all you get is that one trick--rational thinking--but when you're good and crazy, well, the sky's the limit!


C'mon jimmy, time for your meds.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#69 - 2012-06-25 00:06:57 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.

"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
Frying Doom
#70 - 2012-06-25 00:08:21 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.

Have you ever played Eve Online?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#71 - 2012-06-25 00:32:27 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Frying Doom wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.

Have you ever played Eve Online?


My point is that CCP's incompetence is not something that players should be punished for (I mean, on top of having to deal with broken gameplay for years).

They did their diligence by telling CCP about it before it hit TQ. CCP's failure to act means that they should reap the rewards of preparation.

Had nobody warned CCP about this, I'd be singing a different tune.

"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
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#72 - 2012-06-25 00:54:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Dave stark wrote:


C'mon jimmy, time for your meds.


We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct. My own feeling is that it is not crazy enough.

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#73 - 2012-06-25 00:57:26 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.

Have you ever played Eve Online?


My point is that CCP's incompetence is not something that players should be punished for (I mean, on top of having to deal with broken gameplay for years).

They did their diligence by telling CCP about it before it hit TQ. CCP's failure to act means that they should reap the rewards of preparation.

Had nobody warned CCP about this, I'd be singing a different tune.


If their incompetence creates an exploit that you then abuse the **** out of its on you not them

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#74 - 2012-06-25 00:59:52 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.

Have you ever played Eve Online?


My point is that CCP's incompetence is not something that players should be punished for (I mean, on top of having to deal with broken gameplay for years).

They did their diligence by telling CCP about it before it hit TQ. CCP's failure to act means that they should reap the rewards of preparation.

Had nobody warned CCP about this, I'd be singing a different tune.


If their incompetence creates an exploit that you then abuse the **** out of its on you not them


You flew right over the part where CCP was warned about the problem before it hit TQ. That's kind of the whole ballgame. The players did their diligence by telling CCP about a thing. CCP ignored the players. The effects of the thing are on CCP's head.

"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
Valnerae
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2012-06-25 01:02:04 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.


Here's the deal. It's never their (CCP) fault that someone else exploits their design flaws as no game can be perfect. Sure it was a bad move for not fixing it but it still doesn't excuse the blatant exploiting of the system. You see unless you want to convince me the Goons have an IQ lower than 50 they shouldn't be excused for what they did. Anyone smarter than an inbred monkey would have known this would not be allowed, never does a game reward you for blowing up your own **** and most certainly not EVE.

So GOONS were knowingly abusing a design flaw for their profit and no such thing can nor should be accepted.
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#76 - 2012-06-25 01:04:00 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:


You flew right over the part where CCP was warned about the problem before it hit TQ. That's kind of the whole ballgame. The players did their diligence by telling CCP about a thing. CCP ignored the players. The effects of the thing are on CCP's head.


Thats ok given you flew right over the part where I said:

If their incompetence creates an exploit that you then abuse the **** out of its on you not them


And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#77 - 2012-06-25 01:17:33 UTC
Life is not about the second chances. It is about a little mouse and his voyage to an exciting new land. That, my friend, is what life is.

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2012-06-25 01:25:41 UTC
What amazes me is that OP couldn't even post with his main.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#79 - 2012-06-25 01:26:21 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:


You flew right over the part where CCP was warned about the problem before it hit TQ. That's kind of the whole ballgame. The players did their diligence by telling CCP about a thing. CCP ignored the players. The effects of the thing are on CCP's head.


Thats ok given you flew right over the part where I said:

If their incompetence creates an exploit that you then abuse the **** out of its on you not them


If you warn them about it, and they don't do anything about it, then it's clearly not a exploit, regardless of how much ISK you make off of it *cough*tech*cough*

"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
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#80 - 2012-06-25 01:28:07 UTC
Valnerae wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

The bug was reported on SiSi, it was a known bug. They abused it, they should pay. It wasn't like they didn't know that this was a design flaw.


It was reported on SiSi. CCP let it enter the game unchanged. Therefore it should be safe to assume the CCP knew about it and decided they were Ok with it .

Otherwise, If they didn't know about it, it's their fault for not listening to SiSi feedback. If they weren't OK with it, it's their fault for letting it hit TQ.

Since CCP is the only one who can call something a design flaw, a mechanic which they know (or should know) about which reaches TQ must not be a design flaw.


Here's the deal. It's never their (CCP) fault that someone else exploits their design flaws as no game can be perfect. Sure it was a bad move for not fixing it but it still doesn't excuse the blatant exploiting of the system. You see unless you want to convince me the Goons have an IQ lower than 50 they shouldn't be excused for what they did. Anyone smarter than an inbred monkey would have known this would not be allowed, never does a game reward you for blowing up your own **** and most certainly not EVE.

So GOONS were knowingly abusing a design flaw for their profit and no such thing can nor should be accepted.


If nobody had brought the design flaw to CCP's attention before it went live on TQ, you'd have a point.

Also, *cough*tech*cough*

CCP didn't need to fix it necessarily, just announce that it's an exploit until fixed (though they'd get an enforcement nightmare on their hands then).

"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