These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Drone assist "Exploit"

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#41 - 2013-09-21 16:35:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
Please explain where you would offensively use a pos.
The same places (and the same way) you'd use it defensively.

Quote:
To use a Tippia's level of literal verbage... the drones are outside of the shields. The drones can be attacked.
…but the ship cannot. That's the entire problem. So, let's look at that literal verbiage again: If you want to employ your ship's weapons in battle, that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire, not stowed away safely where it can't be attacked.

Quote:
But yes, if you want to use your weapons, you need to be outside of the shield. As of now, that is still possible and not changed.
Actually, right now you can use your weapons and be inside the shield — that is the tactic now deemed an exploit.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2013-09-21 16:47:49 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Yabba Addict wrote:
Assist mechanic sucks ccp, get rid of it



Yea and take away the falcon and blackbird too. They suck as well.


Had no idea one guy could control 200 falcons flown by other people.

Its a silly mechanic.



So it's a matter of amount then?

So if I can control 150 pilots' worth of drones it's ok?

Again, the exploit is not drone assist, sorry you do not like the meta. It's using drone assist while within a pos shield (which I think it should disconnect the drones if you go inside the shield, but assist is fine).

But yes, falcons and blackbirds are indeed silly and should be removed. I'm glad you agree to that silly mechanic.(unless you mean having a FC is silly?)


Come this time next year the screams to get rid of drone assist are going to be deafening. We fully intend to use this hilariously borked system.
Leigh Akiga
Kuhri Innovations
#43 - 2013-09-21 16:48:14 UTC
Dear Nulli Secunda: get some piloting skill and fight for whats yours like everyone else has for 11 years rather than championing exploits and cheats. Stop being bad, I realize you have no control over being bad but championing and lobbying for exploits because your pilots are bad make your alliance look ridiculous. Hope this helps.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-09-21 16:48:24 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

But you did not use the weapons offensive weapon system. You used the drones. And not even that since you cannot control them. The pilot who deployed them does that. They only assist you. You do not decide whether they orbit or guard or warp back to their owner.


True. But you control which target my drones attack. You can't do that for any other module in the game.

Quote:

The issue which people seem to not focus on, is that you should not be able to control your drones across the pos shield, which I agree with.

I just think you guys who cry about the assist function are butthurt by it. And that conclusion came from the fact you made no mention whatsoever about pos shields being used, which is what the exploit is about.


I was focussing on your comment:

Quote:

Quote:

Had no idea one guy could control 200 falcons flown by other people.

Its a silly mechanic.

So it's a matter of amount then?

So if I can control 150 pilots' worth of drones it's ok?
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2013-09-21 16:50:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Please explain where you would offensively use a pos.
The same places (and the same way) you'd use it defensively.


What offensive use does a pos have?

Quote:
To use a Tippia's level of literal verbage... the drones are outside of the shields. The drones can be attacked.
…but the ship cannot. That's the entire problem. So, let's look at that literal verbiage again: If you want to employ your ship's weapons in battle, that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire, not stowed away safely where it can't be attacked.[/quote]

The ship isn't firing its' guns at this point. The drones are, and the drones are using their weapons. Outside of the shield.

Quote:
Actually, right now you can use your weapons and be inside the shield — that is the tactic now deemed an exploit.


Have you even tried firing a gun through the pos wall? I suggest trying it if you are going to claim you can. If you read the exploit, you will see that using the drones to assist across the pos shield is the exploit. Not using your guns (that doesn't work).

If you are still having trouble comprehend it, which is rare but hey it's ok Tippia, go reread it if need be.

Nothing was said of using "weapons" so I'm unsure of where you get that idea. I'll even quote the blog for you here-

"The defect has to do with assigning drones to another pilot and then moving into the safety of a forcefield without having the drones deactivate or return to your dronebay."

Which as an exploit I agree with since that shouldn't be possible. But there is no mention of turrets or anything else in that blog that is referred to as a "weapon".

Since you want "literal verbiage" of course.

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
#46 - 2013-09-21 16:52:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:


True. But you control which target my drones attack. You can't do that for any other module in the game.


You cannot do that with any module period.



Quote:

I was focussing on your comment:


Good job! You're "assisting" like a drone apparently =P

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
#47 - 2013-09-21 16:54:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Yabba Addict wrote:
Assist mechanic sucks ccp, get rid of it



Yea and take away the falcon and blackbird too. They suck as well.


Had no idea one guy could control 200 falcons flown by other people.

Its a silly mechanic.



So it's a matter of amount then?

So if I can control 150 pilots' worth of drones it's ok?

Again, the exploit is not drone assist, sorry you do not like the meta. It's using drone assist while within a pos shield (which I think it should disconnect the drones if you go inside the shield, but assist is fine).

But yes, falcons and blackbirds are indeed silly and should be removed. I'm glad you agree to that silly mechanic.(unless you mean having a FC is silly?)


Come this time next year the screams to get rid of drone assist are going to be deafening. We fully intend to use this hilariously borked system.



Of course, but as it is right now, it's a working mechanic that is legal.

Until it's not.

So it's a light dull roar, as it were.

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.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-09-21 16:54:10 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Which as an exploit I agree with since that shouldn't be possible. But there is no mention of turrets or anything else in that blog that is referred to as a "weapon".


To quote the wiki:

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Weapons_guide wrote:

The three main system types are turret systems (Energy, Hybrid, Projectile), launcher systems (missiles, bombs), and drone systems.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2013-09-21 16:59:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Which as an exploit I agree with since that shouldn't be possible. But there is no mention of turrets or anything else in that blog that is referred to as a "weapon".


To quote the wiki:

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Weapons_guide wrote:

The three main system types are turret systems (Energy, Hybrid, Projectile), launcher systems (missiles, bombs), and drone systems.



To quote the blog from CCP Falcon

http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/drone-exploit-warning/ wrote:
Attention pilots!

Customer Support has been made aware of the use of a specific defect as a tactic in combat. The defect has to do with assigning drones to another pilot and then moving into the safety of a forcefield without having the drones deactivate or return to your dronebay.

Abusing this defect to your advantage is regarded as an exploit, and henceforth will be dealt with as such in accordance with our policies. We appreciate your assistance in making sure everyone plays in accordance with the policies we have in place.

The defect in question is being worked on and will be fixed as soon as possible. If you believe you have discovered a defect, please use the bug reporting tool we have provided. Instructions on how to create a bug report can be found here:

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Bug_reporting

Alternatively, you are always welcome to contact Customer Support directly via support ticket.

On behalf of EVE Online Customer Support


And nowhere in that entire post does it say "weapon systems".

It just doesn't.

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
#50 - 2013-09-21 17:01:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
What offensive use does a pos have?
It's not the POS that is on offence (or defence for that matter) — it's the ships being supported from within it.

Quote:
The ship isn't firing its' guns at this point The drones are
In other words, it is employing its weapons in battle, and therefore that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire — i.e. being outside the shield.

Quote:
Have you even tried firing a gun through the pos wall? I suggest trying it if you are going to claim you can. If you read the exploit, you will see that using the drones to assist across the pos shield is the exploit.
In other words, you're using your weapons while still being inside the shield — a tactic that is deemed an exploit since, if you want to employ your ship and its weapons in combat, that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire.

Quote:
But there is no mention of turrets or anything else in that blog that is referred to as a "weapon"
…aside from the drones, of course. They are supposed to work like every other weapon (and support) system in the game as far as being used from inside a POS bubble goes, but currently they do not. Therefore, using them in such a manner has been deemed an exploit until the mechanics can be put into place to enforce this (non)behaviour.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2013-09-21 17:05:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
What offensive use does a pos have?
It's not the POS that is on offence — it's the ships being supported from within it.

Quote:
The ship isn't firing its' guns at this point The drones are
In other words, it is employing its weapons in battle, and therefore that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire — i.e. being outside the shield.

Quote:
Have you even tried firing a gun through the pos wall? I suggest trying it if you are going to claim you can. If you read the exploit, you will see that using the drones to assist across the pos shield is the exploit.
In other words, you're using your weapons while still being inside the shield — a tactic that is deemed an exploit since, if you want to employ your ship and its weapons in combat, that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire.

Quote:
But there is no mention of turrets or anything else in that blog that is referred to as a "weapon"
…aside from the drones, of course.



In other words. Literal verbiage. Other than.

Awesome. You conceded defeat. Thank you come again.

But you are wrong. I copied the entire notice for you to read. It only pertains to drones being used across the pos shields as you are safely behind it. Nothing else.

No others.

No thans.

No asides either.

That's the verbiage. Literally.

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.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#52 - 2013-09-21 17:10:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
The difference is that in one case, you're using your ship, even though it's not exposed to the combat you're taking part in, whereas in the other case, you're using the POS, which is exposed to the combat you're taking part in.


This is also in addition to the fact that being a POS gunner requires an additional level of training, the proper corporate roles, and is limited by the number of anchored and onlined guns. The drone exploit is limited only by the number of drone boats that you can comfortably cram inside the the POS forcefield, and at that point anyone can have drones assisted to them regardless of skill level or corp roles.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2013-09-21 17:10:57 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

And nowhere in that entire post does it say "weapon systems".

It just doesn't.


It mentions drones. Which are a weapons system, according to the official eve wiki page I quoted.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#54 - 2013-09-21 17:12:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
In other words. Literal verbiage. Other than.

Awesome. You conceded
…that you were the one who was using other words in an attempt to play dumb and not understand how they apply to the situation. No, the literal verbiage stands, and there is no “other than”.

If you want to employ your ship's weapons in battle, that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire, not stowed away safely where it can't be attacked. Using drones to work around this rule is deemed an exploit because they're not meant to be any different from any of the other weapon (or support) systems in that regard.

Quote:
But you are wrong. I copied the entire notice for you to read. It only pertains to drones
…in other words, a weapon system that, like all other weapon systems, is not supposed to be usable from inside a POS shield. Unfortunately, there is a gap between “supposed to be” and “actually can be” that is now being declared an exploit until that gap can be mechanically enforced.
Gary Bell
Therapy.
The Initiative.
#55 - 2013-09-21 17:30:22 UTC
I think we should give this to Nulli.. Let them use this and deem it fair.. But I want unlimited bombs.. ie they dont damage each other.. "So we can bomb the drones" (HArdy har har) and I want my bombs to work in a POS shield.. SO when they do this we can bomb them in the POS..

I think its an even trade.. No one would ever abuse this right.. ?

Thoughts comments?

PS I cant wait to see the videos of CFC deploying 750 carriers with drone assist.. The tears shall drown the world lol
polly papercut
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2013-09-21 17:44:26 UTC
This is EVE. The mechanic is in the game get the **** over it and stop bitching. There is a counter to said mechanic. GOONS are the most self entitled little bitches in gaming history. For the record I have no connection with either side i play EVE less then 20 hours a month just sign In to plex my accounts and que skills.

I pretty much only play because the game is almost free to play it's so easy to make ISK and plex 3 accounts. But I do read the forums when I am bored and over the years I have concluded that Goons are much more like spoiled crying children then the space thugs they think they are. Even though they have zero influence on my game I dislike them. Not for the ganking or blobs of fleets but for the over all self entitlement they feel they have. In a game where you xan freely scam bully and destroy what ever you want if you have a bog enough blob. Bitching over one mechanic you lost to just makes you sound like a pmsing woman.

Like in said they have zero effect one as I hardly play EVE do not really even like the game but its basically free to play with it being so easy to plex using isk.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#57 - 2013-09-21 17:57:02 UTC
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:

And nowhere in that entire post does it say "weapon systems".

It just doesn't.


It mentions drones. Which are a weapons system, according to the official eve wiki page I quoted.



But the exploit notice is specifically set to drones. Which is what we are talking about.

Not weapons.

Drones.

Weapons already do not work through pos shields. You're late to that party.

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
#58 - 2013-09-21 18:02:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
But the exploit notice is specifically set to drones.
…which are a weapon system just like the rest of them. So yes, we are indeed talking about weapons — specifically ones that don't behave the way they're supposed to when mixed with POS shields. That's why the notice specifically talks about drones: because they're the only weapon system that is currently known to not work properly and which therefore need to be slapped with an exploit notice.

Quote:
Weapons already do not work through pos shields.
Most weapons don't, the exception being drones. That's why this anomaly is declared an exploit until mechanics can be put into place to ensure that they work the same as the other weapon (and support) systems.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2013-09-21 18:02:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
In other words. Literal verbiage. Other than.

Awesome. You conceded
…that you were the one who was using other words in an attempt to play dumb and not understand how they apply to the situation. No, the literal verbiage stands, and there is no “other than”.

If you want to employ your ship's weapons in battle, that ship is supposed to be exposed to return-fire, not stowed away safely where it can't be attacked. Using drones to work around this rule is deemed an exploit because they're not meant to be any different from any of the other weapon (or support) systems in that regard.

Quote:
But you are wrong. I copied the entire notice for you to read. It only pertains to drones
…in other words, a weapon system that, like all other weapon systems, is not supposed to be usable from inside a POS shield. Unfortunately, there is a gap between “supposed to be” and “actually can be” that is now being declared an exploit until that gap can be mechanically enforced.



Awww, cute. You decided to not keep your dignity. Name calling will get you nowhere with me Tippia. You know you got outgunned. Deal with it.

Just walk away, you know better regardless of how much you want to keep that grip, you lost it.

When you can fire a missile launcher, return fire can happen (although that's another talk of mechanics if you REALLY want to engage in that one?), same with lasers.

But drones work differently.

Because they are different.

So yes, in "other words" because we all can use really weird strings of letters to make other words, let's just focus on the words that matter.

That drones are drones and are the topic of the exploit.

Not other weapons.

The notice does not cover out flying a missile to avoid damage. It covers using drones (and only drones) while in the safety of a pos using the assign function (assist and guard) to still project damage.

Now, please, I respectfully request that you discontinue "that you were the one who was using other words in an attempt to play dumb and not understand how they apply to the situation." (Your quote).

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
#60 - 2013-09-21 18:04:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
But the exploit notice is specifically set to drones.
…which are a weapon system just like the rest of them. So yes, we are indeed talking about weapons — specifically ones that don't behave the way they're supposed to when mixed with POS shields. That's why the notice specifically talks about drones: because they're the only weapon system that is currently known to not work properly and which therefore need to be slapped with an exploit notice.

Quote:
Weapons already do not work through pos shields.
Most weapons don't, the exception being drones. That's why this anomaly is declared an exploit until mechanics can be put into place to ensure that they work the same as the other weapon (and support) systems.



Nope.

Just drones. CCP Falcon is usually pretty specific and on target with what he means.

Are you implying he is wrong?

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.