These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EXPLOIT: Wardecs, remote repairs and limited engagement timer
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zilero
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2013-02-24 17:13:52 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
Came to the thread looking for an interesting new exploit, found only pilot incomptence and tears over inability to properly pilot a ship. If you have your drones on aggressive during wardecs, YOU DESERVE TO DIE. If you shoot GCCs/suspects during wardecs, YOU DESERVE TO DIE. If you are relying on RR to save you from wartargets, and your enemies outsmart you:

YOU DESERVE TO DIE.

(Dieing = losing ship and getting podded, for those of you who don't understand the difference between a comment on eve, and RL suicide comments.)


Tell me where we touched your JF?
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#62 - 2013-02-25 01:34:20 UTC
I don't know where you touched his jump freighter, but I do know where we've been touching you guys since you declared war on us.
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#63 - 2013-02-25 02:29:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Adriel Malakai
Double post, best post.
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#64 - 2013-02-25 02:29:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Adriel Malakai
NEONOVUS wrote:
Tysinger wrote:
Hello, my name is Tysinger. I am looking forward to long walks on the beach with all of you.
Maybe even go further? mmmmmmm

Wrong thread dude.
Besides all the beaches near me are on fire or will be when my ClF3 arrives.
I wanted to make them all glass in time for the summer.


He was talking to our new friends, Whores in space, who dec'd us yesterday, presumably over this thread.

As you can see, it's working out quite well for them.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2013-02-25 02:56:27 UTC
Doesn't sound like an exploit, but it does seem like an error with the crimewatch system. I thought players were supposed to be allowed to shoot at anyone with a global criminal countdown without getting suspect status.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#66 - 2013-02-25 03:02:45 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Doesn't sound like an exploit, but it does seem like an error with the crimewatch system. I thought players were supposed to be allowed to shoot at anyone with a global criminal countdown without getting suspect status.


The players don't get suspect status. The player who engages the criminal gets a limited engagement, which allows the criminal to defend themselves (even though they'll die when CONCORD arrives).

If someone then reps the player who shot the criminal they will go suspect for RRing someone with a LE flag.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#67 - 2013-02-25 03:06:42 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Doesn't sound like an exploit, but it does seem like an error with the crimewatch system. I thought players were supposed to be allowed to shoot at anyone with a global criminal countdown without getting suspect status.

They are, but what you're not allowed to do without getting suspect status is remotely assist someone who is involved in a limited engagement, and when you shoot a criminal it is a limited engagement.

The OP is literally complaining because he attacked someone and his logistics wasn't able to assist him without becoming suspect flagged.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2013-02-25 03:45:51 UTC
Okay so getting a limited engagement for attacking someone with a GCC sounds right. But shouldn't someone repping someone with a limited engagement get a limited engagement and not suspect status?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#69 - 2013-02-25 03:56:03 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Okay so getting a limited engagement for attacking someone with a GCC sounds right. But shouldn't someone repping someone with a limited engagement get a limited engagement and not suspect status?


That's what we all said when they were designing Crimewatch 2.0, but no one listened. According to CCP, it's bad to have a bunch of individual flags running around, so instead, you just go suspect.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#70 - 2013-02-25 03:59:31 UTC
Adriel Malakai wrote:
NEONOVUS wrote:
Tysinger wrote:
Hello, my name is Tysinger. I am looking forward to long walks on the beach with all of you.
Maybe even go further? mmmmmmm

Wrong thread dude.
Besides all the beaches near me are on fire or will be when my ClF3 arrives.
I wanted to make them all glass in time for the summer.


He was talking to our new friends, Whores in space, who dec'd us yesterday, presumably over this thread.

As you can see, it's working out quite well for them.

I get a warning trying to go there.
You absolutely sure you have all been tested for VDs?
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#71 - 2013-02-25 04:00:44 UTC
They are called STIs nowadays.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#72 - 2013-02-25 04:05:05 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
They are called STIs nowadays.

Whatever they are called your website has them and thus can not be loaded.
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#73 - 2013-02-25 04:19:56 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
They are called STIs nowadays.

Whatever they are called your website has them and thus can not be loaded.


Here is a link for a decidedly less pink (and less awesome) version of the killboard.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2013-02-25 05:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
I have noticed one thing though.

it is not the first time I see whores complain in GD when they loose things, and every time it is due to somebody in their Alliance being a muppet.

I am also extremely disappointing by that Mega fit.... My god man.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2013-02-25 05:54:35 UTC
Cannibal Kane, how come you look virtually identical to Nicolo da'Vicenza?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#76 - 2013-02-25 06:08:40 UTC
Adriel Malakai wrote:
Zilero wrote:
There is a way to exploit current suspect mechanics making you unable to remote repair your corp/alliance mate without going suspect.

Basically it goes like this:

1. Someone not at war with you shoot the target that is being repped.

2. That someone gets concorded and if anyone on your side shoots and/or scrams or in other ways attack this guy you get a limited engagement timer .

3. You now have a limited engagement timer and can no longer be repped by your alliance/corp mate without going suspect.

4. The corp/alliance you have a war with are now free to shoot you because you can no longer receive remote reps.


I suggest this is fixed so you no longer get a limited engagement timer when shooting a criminal.


This is not an exploit, but the way Crimewatch 2.0 is designed to work. No one (including the criminal) is forcing you or your alliance mates to have poor fleet discipline and attack the person who has gone GCC, thus giving yourselves the LE timer. Furthermore this does not prevent you from receiving remote reps - it just means your reps need to go suspect.

Learn to play the game before bitching on the forums.

Designed to work? I am pretty damn sure that is not part of the design. It sounds shaddy as hell to me. I very, very strongly suggest no one use this um... tactic until CCP chimes in with a verdict if it is legal or not. Sounds like a bug.

OP just make a petition explaining in detail the process to CCP.
Spurty
#77 - 2013-02-25 06:26:34 UTC
Pretty dumb sounding to me.

Corp A is dec'd by Corp B
Corp B uses NPC to attack Corp A guy in high value ship.
Corp A guy defends self, shoots GCC criminal.
Corp A can no longer help corp mate due to "mechanics"
Corp B know this and pew pew the high isk value ship without him being able to receive reps so they can win.
(Alternative) However, Corp A just reps him anyway.
Now the war is everyone vs Corp A

Pretty much using mechanics of the game in unintended ways.

This suspect flag was supposed to catch neutral logi. Appears to lock out greens as well.

Pretty clever

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#78 - 2013-02-25 07:24:34 UTC
Spurty wrote:
Pretty dumb sounding to me.

Corp A is dec'd by Corp B
Corp B uses NPC to attack Corp A guy in high value ship.
Corp A guy defends self, shoots GCC criminal.
Corp A can no longer help corp mate due to "mechanics"
Corp B know this and pew pew the high isk value ship without him being able to receive reps so they can win.
(Alternative) However, Corp A just reps him anyway.
Now the war is everyone vs Corp A

Pretty much using mechanics of the game in unintended ways.

This suspect flag was supposed to catch neutral logi. Appears to lock out greens as well.

Pretty clever


The problem with this logic is that the dude from Corp A doesn't need to shoot back, as concord will take care of the offender. The only reason to shoot back is to get on the kill mail.

Furthermore, the only thing that changes is that the logistics ships can be attacked by anyone (if they rep the dudes with the LEs). This, honestly, is not a big deal if you pay any attention at all to your surroundings.

You also should take into account that this situation is, in effect, no different from fighting Corp A while being supported by neutral logistics. if members from Corp A attack the suspect flagged neutral logistics helping Corp B, they'll gain an LE, causing the same situation for the in-corp logi from Corp A. So again, this is working as designed, and the OP needs to stop whining and be less of a downy while on the 4-4 undock.
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#79 - 2013-02-25 07:29:56 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Designed to work? I am pretty damn sure that is not part of the design. It sounds shaddy as hell to me. I very, very strongly suggest no one use this um... tactic until CCP chimes in with a verdict if it is legal or not. Sounds like a bug.

OP just make a petition explaining in detail the process to CCP.


It's not shady at all. They are aggressing someone with a criminal flag, which grants an LE flag to both parties. The in corp logi then gets to choose whether or not they want to rep their corp mate, and face suspect flags, or let them die. This is in place so that you don't have BS invulnerable logi in suspect games/LEs/duels.

Like I said in my above post, the resulting situation is no different from engaging the corp/alliance when backed by neutral logi. If the corp decides to aggress the neutral logi that's suspect flagged (or in this case the criminal), they enter a limited engagement. If the in-corp logi then decides to get involved, they need to face the consequences of that.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#80 - 2013-02-25 11:32:41 UTC
Marlona SkyDesigned to work? I am pretty damn sure that is not part of the design. It sounds shaddy as hell to me. I very, very [b wrote:
strongly [/b]suggest no one use this um... tactic until CCP chimes in with a verdict if it is legal or not. Sounds like a bug.

OP just make a petition explaining in detail the process to CCP.

A character remotely assisting a character with a LE timer gaining a suspect flag is exactly how it was designed to work. And a character gaining a LE timer for engaging criminally flagged or suspect flagged characters was also how it was designed to work.

Perhaps rather than baying like hounds for neutral logi blood prior to crimewatch 2.0 people should have actually listened when we raised concerns about suspect flagging.

"But I wanted their logi to get suspect flagged, not mine."