These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#621 - 2013-07-05 16:03:58 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
You're looking at this the complete wrong way - logging off shouldn't be an encouraged outcome for any scenario.


Can you think of any other scenario that would be impacted? Because I think I can live with a freighter being able to log after 10-20 minutes of being bumped.

The bumping didn't in any way hamper the logoff. If you instead mean the aggression timer - well it impacts the logoff conditions of every ship in space. That is to say, everyone at all times.

It's pretty significant.



It should only affect a ship that cannot dock due to acts of aggression. That's the point when I say freighter and you say "every other ship".

That freighter IS a special snowflake, no matter how you cut it.

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.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#622 - 2013-07-05 16:07:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
It should only affect a ship that cannot dock due to acts of aggression.
No, that's not what the timer is for. The PvP timer is specifically there to make sure that logging off to avoid combat is not a viable tactic for any kind of ship (including freighters, since they were common offenders of abusing the older timer mechanics). There's a completely different timer that dictates those kinds of things and the freighter is already exempt from ever triggering it.

Quote:
That freighter IS a special snowflake, no matter how you cut it.
The only way for it to be special is if you invent some hitherto unknown cut that completely redefines how the game works…
Callyuk
M1A12 Corp
#623 - 2013-07-05 16:18:33 UTC
Snowflakes FTW
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#624 - 2013-07-05 16:29:57 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
Tippia wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
See previous posts.
So you agree that it breaks things and that there is no upside to it, so reducing the timer would be a pretty horrid idea?


Red herring.


No its a very big issue.

A solo frigate or cruiser can no longer catch a wartarget in a freighter and kill it solo. Supers and titans can escape a trap by simply logging off.

You just broke EVE to try and fix an issue you have while refusing to use the tools already available.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#625 - 2013-07-05 16:32:27 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
He didn't mention that they were keeping him aggressed. Because it didn't happen.


Yeah, the noob ship in a starter corp on the killmail was obviously just playing kiss ass.

Oh my, looks like they're recycling too; isn't that **** ban-able?


Funny, it looks like no damage was done by that ship. Guessing they scrammed him, which, once again, is legitimate gameplay(and would have required them to refit). Looks like simple killmail whoring to me. How do you even draw the conclusion that they were recycling?

Oh, and I notice, with some degree of amusement, that his video was removed. No doubt because it contained information that did not support the "facts" of the case.

Again, I call into question whether he was held for 45 minutes before the video started. Seeing as he's done his best to remove any evidence of this, the claim of suspicion is a fair one.



If we are going to guess... let's try to guess why a disposable alt, or even better, a brand new character that's a stranger, in a noobship, was passing by and decided to shoot a freighter or even have the skill to use a scram.

If we are going to guess, that is.

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.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#626 - 2013-07-05 16:33:19 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
He didn't mention that they were keeping him aggressed. Because it didn't happen.


You are correct, the Machariels were not keeping the freighter aggressed. Was someone claiming that the Machariels were keeping the freighter aggressed?

Kaarous Aldurad wrote:
Yeah, like making an attempt to petition bumping actionable, since their policy on it being acceptable gameplay is publicly stated. I'd say a warning for the first offense, then a 3 day login ban for any repeated offenses. Sound good?


Because punishing the victim is all the rage these days.



No. It was said the machariels intentionally disengaged to let their GCC expire.

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.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#627 - 2013-07-05 16:40:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
Tippia wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
See previous posts.
So you agree that it breaks things and that there is no upside to it, so reducing the timer would be a pretty horrid idea?


Red herring.


No its a very big issue.

A solo frigate or cruiser can no longer catch a wartarget in a freighter and kill it solo. Supers and titans can escape a trap by simply logging off.

You just broke EVE to try and fix an issue you have while refusing to use the tools already available.


See, this is the part that makes me want to throw in wholesale with James 315's view of things. Always, always more calls for more safety, more nerfs to pvp in highsec. It's never freaking enough.

It isn't like it's not really freaking easy to avoid getting ganked. It is. If you have half a brain, Google, and the wherewithal to actually do what needs to be done, your margin of safety improves considerably. But no, we still have retards flying untanked Retrievers in highsec with a billion isk worth of implants in their heads, telling me that it's "not faaaaair!" that someone is allowed to shoot at them.

The groupthink of the self made victims never ceases to disgust me. I swear, the forums will make a neg-ten of me long before the game actually does.
Quote:

If we are going to guess... let's try to guess why a disposable alt, or even better, a brand new character that's a stranger, in a noobship, was passing by and decided to shoot a freighter or even have the skill to use a scram.

If we are going to guess, that is.


I whore on killmails I'm not a part of all the freaking time, dude. Plenty of people do it. "Hey, free freighter kill, come get some!". Hilariously, the best ship to do it in, if it's a gank, is a newbie ship, since you lose nothing by losing it, and it still has a gun on it. Stop assuming every new player you ever see is someone's alt. Maybe this guy just saw a chance and took it. In which case, good for him, on a freighter killmail his first day. :)

"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.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#628 - 2013-07-05 16:40:19 UTC  |  Edited by: S Byerley
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
Tippia wrote:
S Byerley wrote:
See previous posts.
So you agree that it breaks things and that there is no upside to it, so reducing the timer would be a pretty horrid idea?


Red herring.


No its a very big issue.


It's a red herring because you insist on discounting the obvious constraints would would make it inapplicable to the cases you're worried about.

Under the guise that.... evidently applying slightly different restriction to high sec is hard and unheard of.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#629 - 2013-07-05 16:42:05 UTC
S Byerley wrote:


It's a red herring because you insist on discounting the obvious constraints would would make it inapplicable to the cases you're worried about.


So why are you ignoring the fact that he sat there for an hour and let this happen?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#630 - 2013-07-05 16:46:36 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:


It's a red herring because you insist on discounting the obvious constraints would would make it inapplicable to the cases you're worried about.


So why are you ignoring the fact that he sat there for an hour and let this happen?


(He obviously didn't), but because I'm more interested in the mechanic than the killmail.
Shainai
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#631 - 2013-07-05 16:46:44 UTC

a ship has no way to aggress, therefore it CANNOT cause an aggression timer. It is simply a victim, and because it became a victim, it cannot log off. You said this is for capitals so they could not escape a fight. Freighters don't fight.



Actually, just because it is an aggression timer doesn't mean that you (or the pilot in this case) caused the aggression, If you have been aggressed (is that actually a word) you get an aggression timer, there's no problem with the aggression timer IMO. Just because a pilot is flying a freighter does not mean he should be safe from everything. the aggression system is in place for a reason, it was made this way so people can not use log offski as a way to escape a death.

My only issue with all of this are the mach. pilots that are keeping the pilot from warping out have no aggression and the use of newb accounts to keep the freighter pilot aggressed. BUT i cannot think of a way to enact an aggression timer on the bumping pilots.

There are ways to avoid a gank, I've flown freighters for years and have never been ganked. I've flown for RF, BF and for myself carrying much more then I ever should have. there have been gank attempts on my pilots, all have failed because i fly with a webbing character.

Our corp has escaped a gank attempt by calling for help recently, we sent help and the pilot escaped.

Don't fly what you can't afford to lose EVE is a cruel world
Don't fly alone... EVE is a cruel world AND it's a MMO (ya know Massively multiplayer online game).

In what MMO game can you play solo and achieve the greatest rewards? I can't think of any and i've been gaming since computers came out. Hint, most (if not all) MMO's i've ever played it takes a group of people to complete things to recieve greatest rewards!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#632 - 2013-07-05 16:49:32 UTC
S Byerley wrote:


(He obviously didn't), but because I'm more interested in the mechanic than the killmail.


So, again, why did he let us keep him there for an hour and do nothing to help himself?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#633 - 2013-07-05 16:56:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:


(He obviously didn't), but because I'm more interested in the mechanic than the killmail.


So, again, why did he let us keep him there for an hour and do nothing to help himself?


I asked my question first; form an orderly queue pls.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#634 - 2013-07-05 16:57:56 UTC
S Byerley wrote:


I asked my question first; form an orderly queue pls.


Answer mine.

He had an hour to get help, why didn't he?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#635 - 2013-07-05 17:00:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
S Byerley wrote:


I asked my question first; form an orderly queue pls.


Answer mine.


nou
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#636 - 2013-07-05 17:00:10 UTC
S Byerley wrote:

It's a red herring because you insist on discounting the obvious constraints would would make it inapplicable to the cases you're worried about.

Under the guise that.... evidently applying slightly different restriction to high sec is hard and unheard of.



You said High Sec. The Wartarget status of a ship generally only matters in.... [drumroll] Highsec.


Why do you feel that a frigate who catches a WT freighter in HS shouldn't be able to kill it?

And since HS currently has no special combat timers, why do you feel HS should suddenly operate under different combat rules than everywhere else? Just because you want to "fix" an "issue" that is entirely caused by your refusal to use the many tools at your disposal?

Tools:
Web your freighter away before the Machs can get the first bump.
Gank the Machs.
Counterbump the Machs and Web the freighter away.
Log off Anyway (odds are, they'll miss a timer extension).
Eject.
Self Destruct.
Disrupt the ganks they attempt until they give up (Blackbirds work great for this).

"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
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#637 - 2013-07-05 17:05:16 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
And since HS currently has no special combat timers, why do you feel HS should suddenly operate under different combat rules than everywhere else?


Because it does already, simply with having CONCORD around. Then add that CCP has special circumstances in the area as a measure to not scare off 9 out of 10 new players -- and will tune it harder if you mess with it's ISK factory (as the typical mouthbreather doesn't think about the consequences).

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#638 - 2013-07-05 17:09:21 UTC
S Byerley wrote:
It's a red herring because you insist on discounting the obvious constraints would would make it inapplicable to the cases you're worried about.
…except that it was instituted to fix exactly the kind of cases we're talking about. There are no constraints that make in inapplicable. If you think there are, please list them.

Quote:
(He obviously didn't)
…except that he obviously did, even by his own description. In fact, he must have, or it wouldn't have gone on for an hour. That's how the mechanics work. If you are so interested in them, maybe it's about time you learn this fact.

Quote:
I asked my question first
You didn't ask any question. Now answer his, and every other question that you've refused to answer so far. You're not even in the queue, and your quips and evasions fail to hide this fact.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#639 - 2013-07-05 17:11:17 UTC
Typherian wrote:
Callyuk wrote:
A gank squad that fails on first attempt and takes an hr to complete the gank should be penalized




Waaah waaah ccp I'm incompetent and want to solo an mmo save me from a coordinated group of players so I don't have to get help waaaah waaah


That's all I got from that. Relying on ccp to save you is the pinnacle of carebeary bs. If a freighter pilot can't get help in an hour but instead goes to the forums to cry about it should be penalized harshly.



That's funny. The same thing about pirates who are failing is being said here about justifying a broken mechanic that's allowing them to supercede punishment by giving them plenty of time for more attempts.

I think people do not realize entitlement works both ways.

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.
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#640 - 2013-07-05 17:11:31 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
You said High Sec. The Wartarget status of a ship generally only matters in.... [drumroll] Highsec.


Why do you feel that a frigate who catches a WT freighter in HS shouldn't be able to kill it?


Sorry, I assumed an exception for war targets fell under "obvious constraints".