These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Warp disrupted wreck to extend agro - CONCORD with no warning
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#1 - 2012-06-23 09:12:08 UTC
There I was stealing from wrecks and I get shot by a Raven. Try to put up a fight, but lose my cheapo fit T1 cruiser. So far business as usual. Returning to the site (the mark having docked to run the timer down) I find a wreck and warp disrupt it. I'm well inside the timer, no warning, no problem. I sit there disrupting this wreck for about 5 minutes. Finally, I think, ok that'll do, either this'll work or it won't.

I click to warp to station ... "Your warp drive is disabled..." Um. What's that now?

Two CONCORD chaps turn up quick smart and put me in a pod. No warning at any point. Not when I start disrupting and at no point during. Of relevance to the mechanic, I suspect, is that I had seen the mark back in space on d-scan as CONCORD were showing up. Something about that makes me think the mechanic has changed recently and the act of the pilot undocking may have caused some sort of flag reset.

Urrgh. Anyone else had this? Anyone want to try it out between alts to confirm?
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-06-23 11:37:52 UTC
UPDATE: had no sec status loss from the CONCORD involvement. Isn't that impossible?
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#3 - 2012-06-23 18:20:56 UTC
Pretty sure scramming a wreck to extend aggro is a bug in and of itself. So really, you were killed by a bug within a bug. Inception?

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
Arcturus Archangel
Archbreed
#4 - 2012-06-23 18:26:13 UTC
Bugception.

[Insert witty quote here]
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#5 - 2012-06-24 11:16:40 UTC
Tah'ris Khlador wrote:
Pretty sure scramming a wreck to extend aggro is a bug in and of itself. So really, you were killed by a bug within a bug. Inception?


I suppose it is, but is pretty well known. I don't think CCP can blame us for playing right to the corners of the sandbox. What's weird is that it let me attack the wreck for several minutes, then decided I deserved CONCORD at the point when I decided to stop and warp. It felt to me like my decision to warp could have been the trigger, like the server's done a "is this guy allowed to warp?" check which cascaded into CONCORD turning up.

Really odd.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#6 - 2012-06-24 18:27:38 UTC
Congratulations, you just encountered some of CCP Greyscale's wonderful "back end aggression changes" that form the foundation of the questionably thought out and entirely pointless crimewatch revisions.

This is the result of shooting objects that don't have players in them not giving you proper aggression timers, in the future where individual aggression timers won't exist you can look forward to even more situations in which you get concorded with no warning.
Sleepy The Dwarf
Space Wizards.
Tactical Narcotics Team
#7 - 2012-06-24 19:56:57 UTC
i have used that tactic many times in past, but not since last expansion it may have changed will have to do some research to see.
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#8 - 2012-06-24 21:29:00 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Congratulations, you just encountered some of CCP Greyscale's wonderful "back end aggression changes" that form the foundation of the questionably thought out and entirely pointless crimewatch revisions.

This is the result of shooting objects that don't have players in them not giving you proper aggression timers, in the future where individual aggression timers won't exist you can look forward to even more situations in which you get concorded with no warning.



Ugh. What?

I feel an extended testing session on Sisi coming on. Cry
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#9 - 2012-06-25 15:36:04 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Congratulations, you just encountered some of CCP Greyscale's wonderful "back end aggression changes" that form the foundation of the questionably thought out and entirely pointless crimewatch revisions.

This is the result of shooting objects that don't have players in them not giving you proper aggression timers, in the future where individual aggression timers won't exist you can look forward to even more situations in which you get concorded with no warning.


CrimeWatch is going to be such a joke if they don't greatly improve the concept over what they originally announced :(

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#10 - 2012-06-25 16:18:16 UTC
The entire thing is inherently flawed because of the intention to remove individual flagging.

Individual flagging being the only thing keeping you from being concorded if the initial condition that allows you to shoot at a person changes.

So look forward to being concorded when shooting someone who corp hops, or when shooting someone right at the end of a war or when aggression naturally expires. The individual timers are the only thing that makes combat in highsec work properly and the entire focus of the crimewarch changes is to remove individual flagging.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#11 - 2012-06-25 18:56:09 UTC
Yep, I recently got shot down by station guns after shooting a WT POS extended a GCC in LS.

Crimewatch is gonna be well designed and without glaring design defects. Roll

"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
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#12 - 2012-06-25 19:41:19 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Crimewatch is gonna be well designed and without glaring design defects. Roll


This reflects all aspects of EVE. It is never broken or designed with terrible math holes.

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#13 - 2012-06-25 20:27:34 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Yep, I recently got shot down by station guns after shooting a WT POS extended a GCC in LS.



Mental. Could some of you ask around your piratey/ninja salvagey buddies to keep an eye on this and report in here. We really do need to build a clear picture. I have had some GM communication on this, which indicated that my situation was perfectly normal and part of proper aggression mechanics now, but made it no clearer than that. I think we'll have to write our own test cases and do them to get to grips with this completely.
CorInaXeraL
The Dresdeneers
#14 - 2012-06-25 20:30:11 UTC
Maybe things are working as intended?

Perhaps a group of rogue CONCORD pilots decided to grief who they thought was a Carebear Mission Runner?

Perhaps the station guns were controlled by a band of merry pirates who's ships were in the docks being repaired, and they saw opportunity?

Maybe Crimewatch and Aggression counters are totally being manipulated by someone who's simply out to take free potshots at pilots because 'Why the hell not?'



...or, of course, it could indeed all be broken. But when is that ever new, or interesting?
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#15 - 2012-06-25 20:41:36 UTC
CorInaXeraL wrote:
Maybe things are working as intended?
...or, of course, it could indeed all be broken. But when is that ever new, or interesting?



Why attribute to malice... etc etc

It could be broken, but if we know how it's broken, it might actually be a good thing, know what I mean?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#16 - 2012-06-25 20:42:48 UTC
Nannageddon wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Yep, I recently got shot down by station guns after shooting a WT POS extended a GCC in LS.



Mental. Could some of you ask around your piratey/ninja salvagey buddies to keep an eye on this and report in here. We really do need to build a clear picture. I have had some GM communication on this, which indicated that my situation was perfectly normal and part of proper aggression mechanics now, but made it no clearer than that. I think we'll have to write our own test cases and do them to get to grips with this completely.


I got my ship back. Huh.

"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
MinefieldS
1 Sick Duck Standss on something
#17 - 2012-06-25 23:35:32 UTC  |  Edited by: MinefieldS
Did you scram a yellow wreck and then he abandoned his wrecks and it became blue? afaik agroing a blue wreck will get you concorded, unless the wreck was a player's ship that got concorded
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#18 - 2012-06-26 00:22:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
Nannageddon wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Yep, I recently got shot down by station guns after shooting a WT POS extended a GCC in LS.



Mental. Could some of you ask around your piratey/ninja salvagey buddies to keep an eye on this and report in here. We really do need to build a clear picture. I have had some GM communication on this, which indicated that my situation was perfectly normal and part of proper aggression mechanics now, but made it no clearer than that. I think we'll have to write our own test cases and do them to get to grips with this completely.

Under no circumstances is getting concorded without warning ever legitimate. Particularly given that you can't even disable the concord warning in highsec anymore. GMs, particularly low level GMs are typically morons who don't understand what the game mechanics are or what their policies are. Always ask for your petition to be elevated to a senior GM, it's the only way you'll ever get it looked at by someone who knows what they're doing.
ShipToaster
#19 - 2012-06-26 03:44:44 UTC
You get a concord warning confirm action box when you try to shoot someone elses wreck if you are fleeted with them. Not sure why you are not getting it.

.
Nannageddon
Doomheim
#20 - 2012-06-26 13:13:57 UTC
MinefieldS wrote:
Did you scram a yellow wreck and then he abandoned his wrecks and it became blue? afaik agroing a blue wreck will get you concorded, unless the wreck was a player's ship that got concorded


It was a yellow wreck belonging to the aggressed player. It was not blue and the other player was not on grid to abandon anyway.

It seems a bit off that you'd be free to destroy an abandoned wreck by salvaging it, but if you shoot it then you get CC'd. From an RP perspective, what possible interest would they have in doing that? What?

Vimsy Vortis wrote:

Under no circumstances is getting concorded without warning ever legitimate. Particularly given that you can't even disable the concord warning in highsec anymore. GMs, particularly low level GMs are typically morons who don't understand what the game mechanics are or what their policies are. Always ask for your petition to be elevated to a senior GM, it's the only way you'll ever get it looked at by someone who knows what they're doing.


I prefer not to discuss GM comms as it pisses them off and is against the rules. I'll just say that I'm satisfied with the outcome.
12Next page