These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

At what point is something an Exploit and not game Mechanics ? Bumped for 60 Minutes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#241 - 2013-07-01 16:42:39 UTC
RAW23 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


You will not be ganked for a load of trit.


You promise?


We have only done it once in the past year and that was an accident.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#242 - 2013-07-01 16:45:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Not really, no. It's one of the best-known (and most effective) counters you have as a freighter pilot.

Having to pay 15 bucks extra per month to follow your freighter around meta-gaming it into warp faster is not a counter. Its a dumb fix to bad game design.


So don't stuff the thing full of goodies then. Its the most simple answer and works every time.

Your plan ("don't stuff the thing full of goodies") doesn't appear to have worked for Saesra Virpio:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18499970

MDD
RAW23
#243 - 2013-07-01 16:51:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
RAW23 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


You will not be ganked for a load of trit.


You promise?


We have only done it once in the past year and that was an accident.


But looking at the killboards, you have taken down five bulk haulers in the last 24 hours carrying no more than 2bil of goods each and two of them were carrying less than a bil. The lowest was only carrying 480mil or so worth of goods. So it sounds like this notion that you will be safe so long as you don't haul high value cargoes is ... how shall I put this ... not true?

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
RAW23
#244 - 2013-07-01 16:54:52 UTC  |  Edited by: RAW23
MailDeadDrop wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Not really, no. It's one of the best-known (and most effective) counters you have as a freighter pilot.

Having to pay 15 bucks extra per month to follow your freighter around meta-gaming it into warp faster is not a counter. Its a dumb fix to bad game design.


So don't stuff the thing full of goodies then. Its the most simple answer and works every time.

Your plan ("don't stuff the thing full of goodies") doesn't appear to have worked for Saesra Virpio:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18499970

MDD


That one is a jump-freighter, though, so worth killing for other reasons. However, the bulk of their kills do seem to be doing exactly the kind of low-value bulk hauling Baltec mentioned. This is a mid-range one: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18511541. 1.4bil in modules [edit: and fuel].

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#245 - 2013-07-01 16:57:35 UTC
Quote:
…and make yourself less of a target.
…and pick the road less travelled.
…and tweak the stats to something they don't expect.
…and learn the aggression mechanics (because these things don't take 60 minutes — in fact, this is where the OP went wrong most spectacularly).


Oh, but Tippia! Those aren't fair!

...

Because they require effort! :P

Don't you know that no effort put in by one person should always trump effort and planning by multiple people?

/sarcasm

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
RAW23
#246 - 2013-07-01 17:00:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
…and make yourself less of a target.
…and pick the road less travelled.
…and tweak the stats to something they don't expect.
…and learn the aggression mechanics (because these things don't take 60 minutes — in fact, this is where the OP went wrong most spectacularly).


Oh, but Tippia! Those aren't fair!

...

Because they require effort! :P

Don't you know that no effort put in by one person should always trump effort and planning by multiple people?

/sarcasm


The issue is not that they require effort but that they do not actually provide any sort of counter once you are under attack. 'Go a different route and hope no one attacks you' is not a counter-tactic that you can use if someone attacks you.

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#247 - 2013-07-01 17:01:41 UTC  |  Edited by: S Byerley
This one is my favorite low-value so far: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=19989747
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#248 - 2013-07-01 17:01:56 UTC
RAW23 wrote:
That one is a jump-freighter, though, so worth killing for other reasons.

That isn't what he said, though. Blowing up an essentially empty jump freighter completely disputes his claim.

RAW23 wrote:
However, the bulk of their kills do seem to be doing exactly the kind of low-value bulk hauling Baltec mentioned. This is a mid-range one: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18511541. 1.4bil in modules [edit: and fuel].

No, the cargo value was mostly the Helium isotopes.

MDD
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#249 - 2013-07-01 17:45:23 UTC
Closest I could find was kernite; too lazy to search properly Ugh

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=18057395
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#250 - 2013-07-01 17:52:13 UTC
RAW23 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
RAW23 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


You will not be ganked for a load of trit.


You promise?


We have only done it once in the past year and that was an accident.


But looking at the killboards, you have taken down five bulk haulers in the last 24 hours carrying no more than 2bil of goods each and two of them were carrying less than a bil. The lowest was only carrying 480mil or so worth of goods. So it sounds like this notion that you will be safe so long as you don't haul high value cargoes is ... how shall I put this ... not true?


We are at war.
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#251 - 2013-07-01 20:13:34 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Not really, no. It's one of the best-known (and most effective) counters you have as a freighter pilot.

Having to pay 15 bucks extra per month to follow your freighter around meta-gaming it into warp faster is not a counter. Its a dumb fix to bad game design.


do you feel the same way about jump drives?
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#252 - 2013-07-01 20:24:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
jedijed wrote:
http://youtu.be/0MmIsrAQPM4

Being Bumped for an hour kinda kills a little bit of the like and excitement i have for this game,,,

Fisrt the 2 machariels bumped me for 10 minutes or so before goons ever showed up.

Second i never fly freightors i knew they get ganked but i thought it was only in .5 .6 systems

Third i didnt know it could be done in 30 fuc***** destroyers :(

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=18472599

http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&view=kills&plt_id=341330&m=6&y=2013



Before I go through the replies to see if it's been said...

How the hell, if you have been bumped for an hour, did you not just logoff?

EDIT- For confusion, I mean if you know you're gonna get blown up, walk away and do something else. For counters I'd suggest realigning to something different or spend that time hiring someone to help.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#253 - 2013-07-01 20:42:04 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
Now you're just being silly; computers are quite smart, especially when analyzing something already broken down into 1's and 0's. Your inability to come up with a naive solution doesn't indicate much of anything.

Uh no, they aren't. Computers can compute, and they can do it really well. They can't come up with solutions of their own to the more broad-reaching types of problems that humans face. They can't, for example, determine intent or what would constitute harassment.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#254 - 2013-07-01 20:50:13 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Ace Uoweme wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:

You do know that language is not set in stone and that words are often redefined over time depending in their usage. The fact that we are even discussing what an "exploit" actually is and can't agree is literally proof of that.


Yeah, all those Dream Paragon supporters said the same. Dream Paragon still got a 10 day suspension and lost the world first -- and they deserved it. When professional gamers cheat, it's b-a-d. They know better.

http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/1549389227?page=1

Worst thing about that exploit was the excuses made, like if they didn't do it...the others would.

If folks got to exploit to play or have fun..."Houston, we have a problem..."

In that case, the DEVs of WoW considered it an exploit and acted accordingly. Again... as everyone has been saying... it's what the company deems an exploit that defines an exploit. It is both black and white and yet grey at the same time.

Tomorrow CCP could declare bumping an exploit and it shall be so. Because they get to decide what is and isn't one.



Not to use your post specifically, but to find a place to chime in...

I think the argument here is illfounded. The term exploit is really easy. Using something for other than it's intended use.

Nothing changes that. Not CCP, not you, not me, not anyone.

Punishing someone for it... now THAT's different.

You don't choose what's an exploit. You choose what's a working as intended mechanic, and what's an exploited mechanic.

Bumping is a mechanic.

How the bumper bumps the bumpee determines if it is working as intended, or exploited.

CCP judges that on a case by case basis.

What you guys need to do, is ask CCP if they designed the mechanic of bumping to allow for someone to be bumper for an hour.

If no, that bumper exploited a mechanic.

If yes, that mechanic is working as intended.

Speeding is still breaking the law, regardless of whether the police punish you for it or not. Your car can still exceed the speed limit.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Ilkahn
Ideal Mechanisms
#255 - 2013-07-01 20:55:55 UTC
RedFrogFreight.

Look them up.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#256 - 2013-07-01 20:56:30 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
Ace Uoweme wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:

You do know that language is not set in stone and that words are often redefined over time depending in their usage. The fact that we are even discussing what an "exploit" actually is and can't agree is literally proof of that.


Yeah, all those Dream Paragon supporters said the same. Dream Paragon still got a 10 day suspension and lost the world first -- and they deserved it. When professional gamers cheat, it's b-a-d. They know better.

http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/1549389227?page=1

Worst thing about that exploit was the excuses made, like if they didn't do it...the others would.

If folks got to exploit to play or have fun..."Houston, we have a problem..."

In that case, the DEVs of WoW considered it an exploit and acted accordingly. Again... as everyone has been saying... it's what the company deems an exploit that defines an exploit. It is both black and white and yet grey at the same time.

Tomorrow CCP could declare bumping an exploit and it shall be so. Because they get to decide what is and isn't one.



Not to use your post specifically, but to find a place to chime in...

I think the argument here is illfounded. The term exploit is really easy. Using something for other than it's intended use.

Nothing changes that. Not CCP, not you, not me, not anyone.

Punishing someone for it... now THAT's different.

You don't choose what's an exploit. You choose what's a working as intended mechanic, and what's an exploited mechanic.

Bumping is a mechanic.

How the bumper bumps the bumpee determines if it is working as intended, or exploited.

CCP judges that on a case by case basis.

What you guys need to do, is ask CCP if they designed the mechanic of bumping to allow for someone to be bumper for an hour.

If no, that bumper exploited a mechanic.

If yes, that mechanic is working as intended.

Speeding is still breaking the law, regardless of whether the police punish you for it or not. Your car can still exceed the speed limit.

Yea I have to agree....bumping someone for an hour is not working as intended.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#257 - 2013-07-01 20:57:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Diomedes Calypso wrote:
I'm also unclear.. if he does nothing, when he eventually gets attacked concord will kill the attackers even if the attackers kill him first .. right?

Does the bumping just give more time to bring in more firepower from other systems to make sure the job gets done?

The bumping serves two purposes.

The most important one is that it creates a controlled environment where the gankers can delay and monitor the CONCORD response. You shoot the target once as he exits gate cloak to give him a PvP timer, which ensures that the ship will stay in space for another 15 minutes, no matter what, so logging off no longer saves the victim. This is obviously a criminal act so CONCORD shows up and kills the flagging alt. To counter this, you take advantage of the 15 minute timer to use a neutral alt (or two) to bump the victim at last 150km away from where CONCORD is sitting. The bumping both ensures that the victim can't just warp off willy-nilly, and that the victim is out of reach from immediate CONCORD response.

Being this far away causes the CONCORD mechanics to consider the target (and, more importantly, the awaiting gankers) “out of range” for the purpose of responding to their actions, which in turn yields the same effect as delaying CONCORD by spawning them somewhere else in the system. When responding to a crime that's this far away, the CONCORD ships first have to despawn from the first crime scene before they can show up at a new one, which delays the response by half a dozen seconds or so. You sacrifice the loss of a newbship with civvy guns for being able to execute the gank with maybe 20–50% fewer actual attack ships. You can also keep a close eye on CONCORD while doing all of this, which means you have more control over the timers.

The second benefit is that the gank now happens maybe 200km off the gate, rather than 15km away from it. As a result, loot thieves will not get as much of a chance to get to the goods, and white knights stand less of a chance counter-killing the looting ships (which will go suspect in the process). If it's a freighter gank, you're likely to need a freighter to loot the wreck, and you definitely want to keep those away from the normal traffic lanes when they go blinky.




Funny part, is if he is being bumped AWAY, why not find a new align point? I mean an hour... that's so long to try a myriad of things. Machs cant move THAT fast.

End of the day, you know not to undock with what you can't afford to lose, and whether it's an hour bump or a 5second gank... it's lost.

Now, as to the fact of trying to logoff and not being able to, and the amount of TIME it took.... I would say it is harassment.

But then, I'm not a DEV who decides.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#258 - 2013-07-01 20:58:40 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

Yea I have to agree....bumping someone for an hour is not working as intended.

How so? If I smash something repeatedly with a big enough hammer, it's going to keep moving, no matter how long I swing at it. Well, until it runs into something that I don't have the force to move, like a brick wall, or a tree.
Elizabeth Aideron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#259 - 2013-07-01 20:58:53 UTC
Ilkahn wrote:
RedFrogFreight.

Look them up.


what about them?
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#260 - 2013-07-01 21:03:32 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ace Uoweme wrote:
No it wasn't. That's player made.
…which is how the devs designed the game. They designed bumping. The players took that tool and started hammering away at the nails with it, as intended. Since no unwanted effects or exploits arose, it was all working as intended and as designed.

Quote:
It's a tactic left in the game for interest, but not specifically designed by devs themselves, just like with ship names. They create it, and players find the exploits and use it.
…except that they're not exploits, and that they're not “left in the game” but part of a concept built around providing a toolset rather than a ruleset. That's the root of your problem: you are stuck in a design frame of mined based around rules. EVE is not that kind of game.

Quote:
But it's still a exploit.
Nope. So sayeth the devs, and they are the only ones who can say whether it is one or not. And their answer is “not” — explicitly “not”, so not even implicitly by leaving it unmentioned or unregulated.

You can keep repeating your quaint lie to yourself as often as you like, but it doesn't change this simple fact.
You are of course free to reject this reality and substitute your own, but that road only really leads to disappointment and medication.

Quote:
The red meat isn't me, it's you trained to attack anything that threatens your comfort zone.
If by my “comfort zone” you mean reality, then yes — I do indeed attack people who spout counter-factual nonsense. That means that until you start accepting reality for what it is, you are very much my target. All you have to do to avoid it is to accept facts as they are and not make up your own.



That's entirely too "god made apples to be bongs" for me lol.

I don't think the DEVs designed bumping with the effect of using it as a non aggression attack to a freighter.

Because they allow for emergent gameplay, they allowed the mechanic to remain. Otherwise, aggression timers on non aggressing entities wouldn't exist.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.