These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP is going to punishing not so intelligent pilots for staying afk in anomalies?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Janus Varg
Smoke Jaguars
#61 - 2012-08-09 14:01:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Janus Varg
So does that mean I couldn't do that if I weren't AFK? I have two screens. I could easily do this and watch a movie or whatever.

I rather hope someone clarifies this. What exactly do we need to do not to count as AFK? It's perfectly possible that I'm at my keyboard and don't need to press anything.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#62 - 2012-08-09 14:11:48 UTC
So if I'm clearing the room with my main and have to alt-tab to my alt who is salvaging/looting in previous room. Does that count as "AFK"?
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#63 - 2012-08-09 14:16:48 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Actually given how low they have set the bar for bot detection, with only 2 data base errors and many thousands of bots eradicated, they are probably justified in there swagger that people they catch are most likely guilty.

I would accept their swagger if I actually believed the "only two false positives, both caused by a database error". I do not, and this thread is an example of why. The algorithm produced an unambiguious false positive (there was no macro or botting program), and that was neverthless declared a bot. Imagine the response when there's not such overwhelming proof a bot is impossible.

Team Security doesn't have only two false positives. Team Security has two false positives that they admit to and their other statements make it very clear they're very unwilling to look for them.
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#64 - 2012-08-09 14:19:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Pak Narhoo
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
So if I'm clearing the room with my main and have to alt-tab to my alt who is salvaging/looting in previous room. Does that count as "AFK"?


Simple answer: no.
Detailed answer: no.

Edit: you talk about missions. Those do not respawn endlessly till downtime rats. I'm guessing here since its a bit vague that your fine with a sentry domi clearing a mission. Highly inefficient and you still need to move the domi back to a station to finish the mission then start a new one.

What CCP is against is AFK complex farming. As described in the dev note/ blog.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#65 - 2012-08-09 14:20:09 UTC
CCP ~cripes~
putting bots into the game, then banning all people who utilizes them.
What are drones if not small bots shooting everything while on autoaggro??!? Combine this with autorespawning plexes and you'll get ISK printing machine.
What about fixing those plexes instead CCP?
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#66 - 2012-08-09 14:21:31 UTC
This isn't a security or botting issue or any other issue that touches Team Security. The instant the parties involved had explained the issue to Team Security and it was clear that no bots, RMT, or the like were involved, the botting warning should have been stripped from the account and the matter referred to the GM team and the game design team to decide if it was some sort of exploit that deserved punishment and/or fixing.

This is a GM decision, they've got the right tools and experience to deal with this sort of thing correctly, and fixing it is a game design issue for the designers. Team Security deciding to label it botting and yank it under their purview is nonsense.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2012-08-09 14:21:59 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
So if I'm clearing the room with my main and have to alt-tab to my alt who is salvaging/looting in previous room. Does that count as "AFK"?

You have to ask the algorithm and it ain't talking.
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp RELOADED
CODE.
#68 - 2012-08-09 14:27:11 UTC
And AFK miners complain when I get a "false positive" by suspecting them of being bots. What?

MinerBumping.com
Lord Vakos
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2012-08-09 14:29:50 UTC
This seems a little absurd to me. You admit people are using no third party software and are simply using in game mechanics in a way that was not intended, something like how Faction Warfare people are holding all systems at vulnerable for weeks at a time. This was clearly not an intended mechanic, but people are abusing it since it is effective. While I agree it is silly for people to be able to AFK farm in a Domi 23/7 this method of enforcement is a slippery slope. If you have a game mechanic that is not working as intended, fix it, do not punish people for taking advantage of it.
Mangone
Plan.B
#70 - 2012-08-09 14:42:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Mangone
Richard Desturned wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Is there any particular reason why a certain room in a certain complex even has to indefinitely spawn more BS rats? Seems to me like that's the problem, not people taking advantage of it.


telling people "stop abusing it while we fix this" as a stopgap measure is also a solution to the problem of a complex that indefinitely spawns BS rats


Its more like request.. Solution is to ban abusers Lol

But yea makes me wonder why it needs to spawn endless waves of BS's.. Is it to make accessing cans harder or keeping site "ready" for next guy or something.. If its impossible to make limited spawns why not throw there few npc neuts or jams etc something that would ruin afk guys rr or cap etc..
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#71 - 2012-08-09 14:49:56 UTC
Lord Vakos wrote:
This seems a little absurd to me. You admit people are using no third party software and are simply using in game mechanics in a way that was not intended, something like how Faction Warfare people are holding all systems at vulnerable for weeks at a time. This was clearly not an intended mechanic, but people are abusing it since it is effective. While I agree it is silly for people to be able to AFK farm in a Domi 23/7 this method of enforcement is a slippery slope. If you have a game mechanic that is not working as intended, fix it, do not punish people for taking advantage of it.

Even if you want to declare something is an exploit, there's people who handle that and it's not team security. The GM team exists for this precise reason, and is the team that should be handling it when a bot or anything security-related is not involved.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#72 - 2012-08-09 14:52:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
doesnt make it less obscure to create PVE content which blatantly asks for certain ingame methods, then punish people who infact dare to apply those methods on it.
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#73 - 2012-08-09 14:54:19 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Dregol wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Octoven wrote:
Your point is valid; however, if they enforce that penalty on AFKing a complex then they must do the same with any other form of AFK actions


Says who? You're talking about two totally different things here.


No, you're wrong. AFK mining, AFK plexing, AFK missioning, AFK god damn ******* industry then should be policed as it makes isk while afk. Even if tending to the ship to empty ore or change drones or get new ones that popped, it's still an afk action while making isk. So no, you're wrong. Goon.


Wrong.

If you'd take the time to read this thread, you'd realize that there was a broken complex whereby people could AFK and have drones kill respawns 23/7. This is /not/ working as intended. AFKing through something that isn't respawning (regular complexes) is fine. What CCP is addressing is a mechanic whereby you can do nothing for hours on end and continue to make isk.

My point from earlier still stands: isk should not be as easy to make as it is in high sec. I'm glad CCP is actively fixing bugs/broken mechanics, but there are mechanics far more broken than this.


I'm merely going to quote this. It's not going to please everyone and certainly not going to please those who were making isk while going about their lives doing things other than playing EVE actively but at the end of the day we're only referring to situations in THIS PARTICULAR CASE where you could in theory generate isk 24 hours a day without ever touching your computer. This does not apply to every situation you might perhaps maybe possibly use sentry drones in and nobody's going to ban your accounts because you went to get a cup of coffee.

There were however cases where this was being abused and so we're stating publically that abusing it is wrong and from this point forward the automated systems will handle it.

Protip for the future: if your computer is logged in 24 (or way more than a person can) hours a day making money in a way that is meant to be active and you're not in front of it you're probably doing something wrong


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=142098&p=3
Tomytronic
Perkone
Caldari State
#74 - 2012-08-09 14:55:10 UTC
Sreegs seems pretty hot-headed for a guy in charge of punishing players. Maybe cooler heads should prevail?
Herold Oldtimer
State War Academy
Caldari State
#75 - 2012-08-09 14:58:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Herold Oldtimer
No one should be [edit]rewarded[edit] for inactivity.
Algol Bailiwick
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#76 - 2012-08-09 15:02:19 UTC
This is just a normal "this is an exploit so don't do it until we code it out of the game" notification, nothing more. The problem is the way CCP Sreegs wrote it makes it sound like he's declaring a a war on AFKing. I hope next time he writes something like this he will run it past a few political officers first!
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#77 - 2012-08-09 15:06:09 UTC
Algol Bailiwick wrote:
This is just a normal "this is an exploit so don't do it until we code it out of the game" notification, nothing more. The problem is the way CCP Sreegs wrote it makes it sound like he's declaring a a war on AFKing. I hope next time he writes something like this he will run it past a few political officers first!

It's really not. Its "the botting algorithm has false positives, so we're redefining that as intended behavior". There is no indication whatsoever this is going to be fixed or there is, in fact, any exploit going on. A plex allows you to do something that Team Security (not the game designers, not the GM team) dislikes (mostly because it trips their algorithm) despite the fact it's using absolutely 100% legitimate game mechanics in absolutely normal and intended ways.

It's not botting, it's not a team security issue, and it's just being defined as one to avoid fixing the algorithm.
Quaaid
Phoenix Foundry
#78 - 2012-08-09 15:07:21 UTC
I believe in the end they will own this as their problem, and not punish the end users for their shortcomings in presenting the content.

The implimentation of Diablo 3 taught the game development market a massive lesson, in that the player base will not accept the development team pushing their flaws back onto the player base in form of restriction.

CCP is generally very good at owning their problems.
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#79 - 2012-08-09 15:14:15 UTC
Sreegs' fancy algorithms have, after a tremendous effort by the security team, conclusively proven that PvE in EVE... sucks.
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#80 - 2012-08-09 15:14:27 UTC
hmm I don't think getting popping out sentry drones and going afk (while these sentry drones shoot back at stuff that shoots at them or pilot) should be considered cheating... merely bad game design... the people who have been doing this were simply smart... because they were not using bots or scripts... and still earned afk money

Now what's the fix for this? banning the players for using ingame mechanics that are basicly not exploits? or making the mechanics not work anymore? (like sentry drones try to get back to ship after 1 hour or simply abandon themselves?... that would be a fix? if the player then uses a script to make this not happen... then you can ban them!

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934