EVE Information Portal

Even with a relatively stable PC and stable connection your client will crash, your power will go out, CCP's datacenter will randomly drop a main uplink, or your own Internet connection will develop issues. If you play regularly it follows that these events will inevitably occur at a 'bad time'.

The purpose of the changes is to eliminate the possibility of entering a less vulnerable state by intentionally terminating your session.

If there is no credible threat to the player at the time they disconnect, there is no logical reason for 'free kill' flagging them towards the end of reducing the efficacy of session termination as evasion.

There are certain additional conditions which could be inserted into the logic of the proposed changes to further discriminate between 'credibly threatened / intentionally disconnected' events and 'not at threat / unintentional disconnection'.

You seem unsatisfied with these proposals for fairly nebulous reasons ('you should accept the consequences', 'consent to PVP', ??? having a hard time pulling a cohesive argument out of your inane babbling) and seem to be in essence advocating for players to enter a much more vulnerable state by logging off or losing connection than they would have been if they remained logged in simply because you want them to.

If you would like to advocate for Eve to be made easier because you are bad at it, perhaps you should start a new thread rather than derailing this discussion which concerns changes that are intended to address another issue.

Ya know this whole new PVE timer thing has me extremely annoyed.

Just now I just had all my clients disconnect, a friend disconnected too so If its not the entire server dying then its probably a routing issue to CCP.

Either way, now I cannot log in.

I was JUST about to run wormhole sites.

If this happened after the new patch, I can guarantee that all my ships would be dead. Sleepers scramble almost every single ship when you are in a WH site.

So all of our ships would be scrambled by sleepers and would certainty be dead in the 5 minute timer that CCP is going to implement.

They wouldnt be able to e-warp out as suggested, unlike people running level 4 missions in high sec who this really doesnt effect.

Now lets say CCP is really, really generous that day and they do replace my hulls. Fantastic. But lets be honest, WH sites are f***ing hard. T2 fits do NOT cut it. So I am going to definitely be out a good amount of isk.

Is the goal for people to earn isk running high sec missions by making 0.0 or WH ratting harder or more dangerous then it already is?

Time to start moving some ships to Motsu and run level 4's again, at least I wont die due to disconnection issues.

No, 60 seconds is not adequate time in many cases to avoid being probed. It is not effortless but it is possible with regularity to probe a player in an unknown position in <60s, and even outright destroy players in lightly tanked ships logging unaggressed from nearby known positions.

The only case where it is regularly not possible to probe a player before disappearance is when, as you suggest earlier, they log on a reasonably long mid-warp. This is indeed a very common theme in many intentional logoffskis, but none of the changes address this and no degree of enthusiasm for misguided changes resolving non-issues and/or with high rates of false positive will apply said gaffes to this an actual issue.

I would like to further clarify a possible misunderstanding. People aren't playing the game to randomly lose their **** for no reason, that's not a risk you accept. This isn't Waste My ******* Time Online. 'Consenting to PVP' implies two or more players ('Player ... Player') and a contest ('Versus'). Not one player, an inanimate construct, and a foregone conclusion.

The imperfect state of the game with regard to disconnection, lag, client stability etc. does not represent the ideal towards which continued development strives and the fact that it is imperfect is not in itself adequate or rational justification for taking large steps backwards.

I'm not sure how else you expect me to interpret a steadfast refusal to examine the possibility of constraining the scope of speculative flagging to scenarios where players actually log off to evade PVP, other than a desperate appeal for more low hanging fruit, but you aren't exactly leading me further away from that conclusion.

First off, you cannot use disconnect, bad internet, etc as an excuse. Because everyone will use that excuse and lie about it.

Second, the new "safe log off" method will be so that you sit in a safe area, for 1 minute timer, once that timer disappears you are shown as log off and disappear right away. If you don't use that feature, you will be shown as logged off and will take 1 minute to disappear, in which them your "prober" will come and try to scan you down, warp to you, and point you in 1 minute.

Third, In EVE when you play this game you consent to PVP regardless. Whether it be getting killed in a lowsec gatecamp or getting suicide ganked in a freighter at Niarja. Of course people don't play to get ganked, but in this game you have agreed to such conditions and you have no say if something happens from those conditions. Players didn't play to getting suicide ganked or gatecamped, but they consent to the possibilities that it would happen. You as a member of Goonswarm should understand that well.

EVE is not safe and it has risks. It is by the very nature of this game, your complaints goes against those very fundamentals, this is not Hello Kitty Online, this is EVE Online aka HTFU or adapt or die. If you don't like that then this game isn't for you.



"Some of us have real life here, not like you." Really you're throwing some outside gaming stuff to insult me. So what if you have a "life", that doesn't matter in this game.

If stuff happens I deal with it. I may get annoyed here and there, but change happens good and bad. You just to accept the fact that this game is changing.

You are narrow minding to think this will benefit pirates; this will benefit gameplay as a whole. Logoffski is a ridiculous and silly game mechanic used to avoid PVP, without any use of piloting or game input other than simply closing the client.

EVE is 100% active consensual constant PVP. You undocking is a consent for PVP, whether you like it or not.

The problem becomes is how do you distinguish between an accidental and a knowing and willful disconnect?

How will CCP make it so without requiring spyware programs to monitor your every move and whatsoever?

From what I can see it virtually impossible without resort to questionable and illegitimate methods that breach privacy.


If something happens that you believe is not your fault, then you are always free to petition it.

Otherwise I applaud the end to this ridiculous Logoffski that has been rampant for a while now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afo88ovdWbg

16:55 Logoffski.

Scanning down a player, warping to him, locking and aggressing him in under 60 seconds is only possible if
-the scanner already had his probes out and placed
-near the target
-immediately scans
-has a very short warp distance
-has a fast-aligning
-and fast locking ship
In summary, it is very, very unlikely. That this player will be there and have his probes ready just at the moment where you have a legitimate disconnect, which he immediately notices and takes advantage of, is extremely unlikely.

Players abusing illegitimate logoffskis to avoid pvp is much more likely and much more common. For example, I recently stalked a group of ISK farmers in a C5 wormhole who ratted with two dreads and two carriers. After many hours of work, taking great care to not be detected, I had 30 people logged out in the system. When the farmers ratted the next day, we jumped on top of them to get our well-earned capital kills. We aggressed the carriers and killed them, but the dreads had immediately logged off and vanished shortly thereafter, even though they were in siege when we attacked and we of course pointed them. Under the new rules, those dreads would now be as dead as they should be.

So we have some theoretical edge cases where some people will suffer losses because of legitimate network issues, and we have a ton of cases where the new system will be a massive improvement. Without a doubt CCP made the right call.

And btw, when you crash after a gate-jump, and get pointed by a camp before your ship can e-warp, chances are they will kill you in under a minute anyway, with all your modules turned off. So this is hardly a change.

Are you deliberately being thick? Keeping the 60 second timer with the new mechanics makes "a bad time" literally all of the time-- any time there is a prober in system you can't disconnect without dying. What's so hard to understand here?



Are you being intentionally thick? If you see a bunch of enemy ships on scan 10-15 seconds away you could, I don't know, warp out?

If you had been doing anything relevant previously (shooting players, ratting, etc) then under the new system you can't ctrl-q anyway-- if you were fighting you have a combat timer. If you were ratting you still have an NPC timer. Either way your ship stays in space for several more minutes. The only time your objection becomes semi-plausible is when the DCer was doing nothing at all prior to disconnecting, and even in this case they could just as easily avoid your hostiles by warping out as they could by DCing. Much like your complaint that "a 15 second timer would allow frigates to jump into lone battleships camping a gate and escape the battleship by closing the client," I fail to see how your argument makes any practical sense. Why would you DC your client to avoid something that you could much more easily avoid by simply moving?

The 60 second timer has the potential to punish anyone who logs off the game at all, at any time, for any reason. Do you not see a problem with this? Or are we supposed to buy your argument that you should always be killed in EVE, no matter how many precautions you take? I think if you compare your attitude to the attitude of the developers (which can be inferred pretty clearly from the body of existing game mechanics) you'll find that EVE is really based around consensual PvP-- the only way you'll find your ship getting blown up in EVE is if you deliberately expose yourself to risks, either by ignorance, laziness, or intentionally. If you know how the game works and deliberately avoid combat, there's basically zero risk of dying in EVE. Until now, apparently. The proposed mechanics will leave you extremely vulnerable to being killed REGARDLESS of what you do any time there's a hostile covops in system with you. This is not acceptable.

Actually, it's not unlikely at all. I've spent whole days in nullsec with pissed off people continuously trying to probe me out. Some of them do it for literally twelve hours at a time. Now imagine the gates to the system are camped. What are you going to do? You literally can't log off without dying. Pretty stupid IMHO.

Without a timer reduction for un-aggressed ships, the change is heavily skewed against anyone who doesn't have a station or POS to log off in-- essentially, anyone who works in hostile space. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with fighting in hostile space being "risky"-- that's what I do it pretty much full time. I'm also all for CCP eliminating the logoffski as a way to avoid combat-- IE, I'm in a Drake and jump into a system and find a Jaguar on the gate-- I DC because I know my Drake can absorb a Jag's damage for at leas 60 seconds. Or, I'm in a carrier and I jump to a cyno beacon. As I appear, a Rapier decloaks next to me. I ctrl-q before my invuln timer ends or the Rapier's targeting delay ends because I figure I can probably survive for 60 seconds.

In those kinds of scenarios, logging off should never be a viable way to avoid combat; you should never be able to make up for your own laziness, stupidity, or both by simply ctrl-q'ing.

The problem with the 60 second timer under the proposed mechanics is that suddenly ANY logoff becomes a great opportunity for you to get killed. As long as there's someone willing to poopsock probes all day you can't log off of the game, regardless of whether the log is intentional or not and regardless of whatever precautions you've taken to avoid dying (e.g. making a safespot and cloaking in it to avoid people). It's not right to punish players for circumstances entirely outside their control. When you jump into a small gatecamp unscouted, that's not something beyond your control. You should be punished. You can't expect though that players should be able to avoid disconnecting from the game until the next downtime. That's just not reasonable.

By shortening the vanishing timer, you retain the ability to punish people for their bad decisions (unless you live in Soon Shin's world where its impossible for campers to shoot at a DCing ship in under 15 seconds-- I guess all the lone campers in his region camp in sieged Dreads? v0v), but players who were deliberately avoiding engaging in risky behavior (by, say, being cloaked in a safespot) don't get killed in spite of the precautions they deliberately took.

There's simply no reason to argue against shortening the timer under the proposed mechanics unless you're that person who intends to sit in a gatecamped system with probes out all day long waiting for someone to log off so you can get a free kill. Personally I don't think people who are deliberately employing techniques to avoid being killed (in stark contrast to those who bumble around hoping to survive on "luck" and their ability to DC) should become free kills. I know there's probably a lot of people who would love a mechanic to be inserted that let them kill people simply based on the amount of poopsocking time they're willing to put in, regardless of whether or not their target made a poor decision but that's not how EVE works. In EVE, things are risky, but there's always a way for the determined to avoid being killed if that's what they want. The only people you can actually kill in EVE are the ignorant and the lazy (or people who are some combination of both!), and that's probably how it should stay.

I bolded the funny parts.

WHAT PART OF "I HAVE REGULARLY ENCOUTERED SCENARIOS IN WHICH PEOPLE HAVE PROBED FOR ME ALL DAY LONG" DO YOU NOT COMPREHEND?

If people are probing for you constantly, it is in fact highly likely that any disconnect will coincide with a moment in which you are actively being probed! What a coincidence!

The real question here is, why do you feel this need to institute game mechanics that leave the door wide open to players going killed through involuntary disconnects when shortening the timer has zero adverse effects on your ability to kill players who deliberately do something stupid. As I've reiterated about a hundred times already, you DO NOT NEED 60 seconds to aggress someone who jumps into your camp unscouted.

This is the kind of behavior CCP (and I, for that matter) want to see punished. Since you can punish this behavior without also screwing over anyone who happens to get DCed involuntarily (by shortening the vanishing timer) why would you insist on maintaining a 60 second timer that punishes both legitimate and illegitimate DCs? There's simply NO REASON not to shorten the timer.

You are wrong logoffski does exist and is being abused. Whether you acknowledge that it happens, the testimonies that exist far outnumber your claims it does not.

Besides if you log off in a pos you have the opportunity to to safely log in that pos.

Now back to the claim made by the member of goonswarm and ridiculous hyperbole of having connection accidents when people are trying to probe him down.

Unless the pilot already has combat probes out and knows precisely where and when you exit warp, he will most likely not catch you in one minute.

Stop using occassional and seldom real life events to justify things. The game will move on regardless of what happens. HTFU and adapt or die.

A short timer given to everyone is a short timer and opportunity given to logoffski.

A minute ensures that logoffski can no longer be exploited and gives a clear message that you must play the game if you want to survive.

Maybe if your fear of being probed is so bad then you should dock in a station or safe log in a pos. If someone traps you where you are and you allow yourself to get trapped well ctrl-q shouldn't be a get out of jail free card for you.