These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#81 - 2013-09-21 18:34:20 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:



So if you come into the pos while I'm in it as well I cannot target you?


You cannot target while inside a POS and nobody outside the POS can target anything inside.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#82 - 2013-09-21 18:35:27 UTC
Domanique Altares wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Mag's wrote:
What are you smoking Murk Paradox? Drones are a weapon system and it's been deemed an exploit to use them in this way. What about that is so hard to understand?

I don't think you're actually playing dumb in this regard, if that helps.



I'm not posting any lack of understanding.

I'm dissolving the notion that the exploit includes anything other than drones.
No one has said otherwise in this thread, except you.


Pretty sure Murk bales his own hay for the amount of strawmen he uses.


LOL

In a way, yes, I question everything since I do not like to assume and then go crying to the forums when I'm wrong.

Which entirely far too many people here do.

As a strawman? Not so much. You see... I rarely come up with anything on my own. I usually use other peoples' own faults and inconsistencies to trip them up.

I don't need to be rude, or find ways to poke fun at people. They do that to themselves enough, I just point it out.

Very rarely am I ever not polite about it either.

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
#83 - 2013-09-21 18:36:36 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
As a strawman? Not so much. You see... I rarely come up with anything on my own. I usually use other peoples' own faults and inconsistencies to trip them up.
Too bad that you tripped over your own construct yourself. Had you stuck with using what other people wrote rather than construct that strawman, you might have been ok…
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2013-09-21 18:37:17 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



So if you come into the pos while I'm in it as well I cannot target you?


You cannot target while inside a POS and nobody outside the POS can target anything inside.



So you are clearly stating that if you came into my pos because you had permission, and were damaged, I could not target you and logi you if I too were inside the same pos?

That's where I needed the citation.

I already know you cannot target across the pos shield.

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
#85 - 2013-09-21 18:37:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
As a strawman? Not so much. You see... I rarely come up with anything on my own. I usually use other peoples' own faults and inconsistencies to trip them up.
Too bad that you tripped over your own construct yourself. Had you stuck with using what other people wrote rather than construct that strawman, you might have been ok…



Funnily enough, that applies to you more than me.

I'm not the one adding "weapon systems" to an already clear notice on an exploit.

Keep in mind, this all came about when the talk started focusing on the assist function over the pos shield aspect of the exploit.

You might want to retain that when you decide which stance you are taking.

The conversation is not always about what you want it to be.

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.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#86 - 2013-09-21 18:38:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Murk Paradox wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Mag's wrote:
What are you smoking Murk Paradox? Drones are a weapon system and it's been deemed an exploit to use them in this way. What about that is so hard to understand?

I don't think you're actually playing dumb in this regard, if that helps.



I'm not posting any lack of understanding.

I'm dissolving the notion that the exploit includes anything other than drones.
No one has said otherwise in this thread, except you.



That is way too vague to even bother trying to assume you are entering a conversation for other than a mob mentality.
No one has put forward the notion in this thread, that this exploit includes anything other than drones. I know reading and comprehension is a problem for you, but I'm sure that was clear enough.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#87 - 2013-09-21 18:39:29 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



So if you come into the pos while I'm in it as well I cannot target you?


You cannot target while inside a POS and nobody outside the POS can target anything inside.



So you are clearly stating that if you came into my pos because you had permission, and were damaged, I could not target you and logi you if I too were inside the same pos?

That's where I needed the citation.

I already know you cannot target across the pos shield.



How about we skip the citation, and you go try it for yourself? It will obviate the need for you to invent more circular arguments about the fact.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#88 - 2013-09-21 18:39:45 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:



So you are clearly stating that if you came into my pos because you had permission, and were damaged, I could not target you and logi you if I too were inside the same pos?



No you cant. You would be unable to target anything while inside the POS.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#89 - 2013-09-21 18:41:08 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

I'm not the one adding "weapon systems" to an already clear notice on an exploit.



No, CCP did. A long time ago. Here's your citation. Drones are a weapon system. Just like you're a mammal, even if no one ever clarified that to you.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#90 - 2013-09-21 18:41:21 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Mag's wrote:
What are you smoking Murk Paradox? Drones are a weapon system and it's been deemed an exploit to use them in this way. What about that is so hard to understand?

I don't think you're actually playing dumb in this regard, if that helps.



I'm not posting any lack of understanding.

I'm dissolving the notion that the exploit includes anything other than drones.
No one has said otherwise in this thread, except you.



That is way too vague to even bother trying to assume you are entering a conversation for other than a mob mentality.
No one has put forward the notion in this thread, that this exploit includes anything other than drones. I know reading and comprehension is a problem for you, but I'm sure that was clear enough.



Uhm, no. My reading comprehension is just fine. Yours might be in question though since you said noone else is trying to say anything else, since that was the last 2 pages have been; Tippia including "weapons systems" into the exploit.

I have always said it's only drones and nothing else.

I'm not the one arguing against that.

Oytherwise, you and Tippia would be in agreement.

Since you aren't...

You should rethink your attack.

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
#91 - 2013-09-21 18:42:51 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm not the one adding "weapon systems" to an already clear notice on an exploit.
Neither am I.

Quote:
I have always said it's only drones and nothing else.
I'm not the one arguing against that.
Oytherwise, you and Tippia would be in agreement.
Mag's and I are in full agreement.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#92 - 2013-09-21 18:43:12 UTC
Domanique Altares wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:

I'm not the one adding "weapon systems" to an already clear notice on an exploit.



No, CCP did. A long time ago. Here's your citation. Drones are a weapon system. Just like you're a mammal, even if no one ever clarified that to you.



I'm not arguing a drone being a combat system. I'm saying the exploit only has to do with drones.

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
#93 - 2013-09-21 18:43:49 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm not the one adding "weapon systems" to an already clear notice on an exploit.
Neither am I.

Quote:
I have always said it's only drones and nothing else.
I'm not the one arguing against that.
Oytherwise, you and Tippia would be in agreement.
Mag's and I are in full agreement.



But you did. I can quote you if you need it.

I'll even give you time to make the necessary edits if you need.

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
#94 - 2013-09-21 18:44:30 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
But you did. I can quote you if you need it.
Please do.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#95 - 2013-09-21 18:48:00 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Domanique Altares wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:

I'm not the one adding "weapon systems" to an already clear notice on an exploit.



No, CCP did. A long time ago. Here's your citation. Drones are a weapon system. Just like you're a mammal, even if no one ever clarified that to you.



I'm not arguing a drone being a combat system. I'm saying the exploit only has to do with drones.


Because the drone system is the only one currently able to take advantage of the exploit. If something were discovered that allowed to you operate other weapon and support systems from inside the POS forcefield, that would very clearly be labeled an exploit as well.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#96 - 2013-09-21 18:48:09 UTC
Ok, for the sake of damage control, I'm going to reiterate what I said before ...

This thread is about using drones and assigning them and using the pos shield for defense as an exploit.

Not about "weapon systems".

Not about missiles, not lasers, not ewar, not reppers.

Drones.

Keep it simple ffs.

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.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#97 - 2013-09-21 18:49:15 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Mag's wrote:
No one has put forward the notion in this thread, that this exploit includes anything other than drones. I know reading and comprehension is a problem for you, but I'm sure that was clear enough.



Uhm, no. My reading comprehension is just fine. Yours might be in question though since you said noone else is trying to say anything else, since that was the last 2 pages have been; Tippia including "weapons systems" into the exploit.

I have always said it's only drones and nothing else.

I'm not the one arguing against that.

Oytherwise, you and Tippia would be in agreement.

Since you aren't...

You should rethink your attack.
He hasn't though. But at this point I think you either:
A. know you made an error and are continuing to argue anyway.
B. knew all along and have trolled.
Or C. I was right in the first place..

And as Tippia has already said, he and I are in agreement.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#98 - 2013-09-21 18:50:12 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

This thread is about using drones and assigning them and using the pos shield for defense as an exploit.


Being as this is not your thread, you don't actually get to define what it is about.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#99 - 2013-09-21 18:51:24 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
This thread is about using drones and assigning them and using the pos shield for defense as an exploit.
Not about "weapon systems".
It's about drones, which are a weapon system like any other…

…except that through some trickery, you could employ that weapon system in a fight without exposing the ship to the same fight. This has been deemed an exploit since, 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.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2013-09-21 18:51:36 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
This thread is about using drones and assigning them and using the pos shield for defense as an exploit.


Correct. The change that sparked the OP is bringing the weapon system "Combat Drones" back in line with the weapon systems "Turrets" and "Launchers".

Quote:
Not about "weapon systems".


As has been stated multiple times already: Drones are a weapons system.