These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

eWarp or how to get tied up and pooped on

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bob FromMarketing
Space Marketing Department
#81 - 2013-11-28 17:08:55 UTC
Buhhdust Princess wrote:

No you didn't :P


Well, we did anyway.
kahlan650
Priory Of The Lemon
Brave Collective
#82 - 2013-11-28 17:11:26 UTC
Tara Read wrote:
Typical circle jerking and **** posting aside, there is clearly an undefined grey area here in regards to not only emergency warp mechanics but also it's relevancy in specific systems ie null, low sec. As someone who was actually there on comms and in fleet standing by we had no detailed knowledge until cyno up and oh an Erebus.

If anything I see several points that need to be addressed:

1. CCP knows of ewarp issues yet failed to seriously look at them.

2. Logging off in a pos yet not logging back into the pos on log in was mentioned to be a coding issue therefore ewarp is the result and needs to be changed.

3. Rubicon's warp speed changes drastically altered ships vulnerabilities and this is just another jarring example.

I'd also like to see proof from PL or RnK where GM's specifically said "no" when it came to using this method to tackle/bump Supers. If so why not make this knowledge public from CCP? Did they only think people who asked may have known about it? If anything this will force CCP to look at ewarp and pos issues more seriously especially in tandem with Rubicons changes.

Irregardless it was an awesome kill and thanks to everyone who made it happen.



Usually what happens when people start linking petitions is that CCP get upset and start banning people.
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#83 - 2013-11-28 19:18:29 UTC
Last time i contacted support about possible mechanic exploit, i got response that they cannot
"offer explicit answers to hypothetical or potential scenarios which might constitute abuse of the EULA or TOS."
And
"Please understand that any report of actual abuse must be investigated on a case by case basis."

So to define if it is exploit or not there should be precedent. GJ SC, nice catch. Maybe we'll see some changes in this field any time SOON™.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Lady Naween
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2013-11-28 19:41:41 UTC
and lets face it, the reply you get can vary a lot. One GM will say, bad puppy. the next will say, its ok.

*shrugs* Yes I am bitter about some GM replies I have got in the past :) I am still mad about that pos tower that vanished in thin air and got told, nothing we can do about it as we couldnt be sure you would have been able to scoop it.
Euasked
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2013-11-28 19:52:48 UTC
Lets face the obvious here guys.

If this was a legit mechanic, does anyone really believe that Shadow Cartel, of all people, would have been the first to use it?

Please.
Slepi voznik
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2013-11-28 20:02:15 UTC
Euasked wrote:
Lets face the obvious here guys.

If this was a legit mechanic, does anyone really believe that Shadow Cartel, of all people, would have been the first to use it?

Please.


Maybe they were the first ones that had balls to try it?

I think that until CCP says that it's an exploit this is a totally legit tactic for killing titans. Either fit inertia stabilizers and MWD or die it is that simple.
RoCkEt X
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#87 - 2013-11-28 20:34:03 UTC
Firefox4312 Yatolila wrote:


So, CCP definitely needs to go through these mechanics and fix them as well as deem this as an exploit. Because if they flat out say it's not, that gives people like PL and PHEW the ability to do this without worrying about a ban at all.

My suggestion would be to do something along the lines of making any Super class hull a "Large Collidable Object" on login, so if anything does land on it to bump it, the super will act similar to POS towers, Stargates, Stations, and won't be affected by the bumps. This should only be limited to the ewarp phase itself, and once it's out of ewarp, that status condition (if you can call it that) should be gone, so the titan acts like it always has when bumps come into account.



Since joining PL, i've chatted with several FC's, several of which were already aware of the mechanic, but ALL of them considered it to be at least a 'grey area' if not plainly an exploit.

While PHEW no longer exists, the members have since joined PL, the former PHEW pilots are a mere fraction of the people within PL capable of pulling this off with relative ease.

Previously, this was only possible to use against titans (except the ragnarok, which warps too fast anyway) because of the warp speed changes, it can now be used against any supercapital. Using MWD's will work for supers (to get into warp in 10 seconds, but not for titans, which take 2 cycles. While the mechanics stand as they currently are, it is not possible to safely log in any supercapital ship.



SOLUTION:
My proposal for a solution was simple. When you undock for example, you have an invulnerability timer for 30 seconds. During this timer, you cannot be bumped or locked. The invulnerability is terminated when you activate a module, and allows you to be bumped.

The simplest solution to this would be to make ships that are logging in and warping back to their log-off spots invulnerable, until they land out of warp. This means, that in the e-warp spot, the ship would be unlock-able, unbumpable. Resolving the current issues completely.



Thoughts?
-Rock
W0wbagger
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#88 - 2013-11-28 20:50:50 UTC
RoCkEt X wrote:


Since joining PL, i've chatted with several FC's, several of which were already aware of the mechanic, but ALL of them considered it to be at least a 'grey area' if not plainly an exploit.

While PHEW no longer exists, the members have since joined PL, the former PHEW pilots are a mere fraction of the people within PL capable of pulling this off with relative ease.

Previously, this was only possible to use against titans (except the ragnarok, which warps too fast anyway) because of the warp speed changes, it can now be used against any supercapital. Using MWD's will work for supers (to get into warp in 10 seconds, but not for titans, which take 2 cycles. While the mechanics stand as they currently are, it is not possible to safely log in any supercapital ship.


SOLUTION:
My proposal for a solution was simple. When you undock for example, you have an invulnerability timer for 30 seconds. During this timer, you cannot be bumped or locked. The invulnerability is terminated when you activate a module, and allows you to be bumped.

The simplest solution to this would be to make ships that are logging in and warping back to their log-off spots invulnerable, until they land out of warp. This means, that in the e-warp spot, the ship would be unlock-able, unbumpable. Resolving the current issues completely.



Thoughts?
-Rock



It's a possible solution but one that backtracks from what CCP presumably spent time and money implementing (modifying bubbles to work on ewarp login spots, as per masterplan's post).
If CCP want to retain this functionality then the other solution would be to make ewarp cancel upon aggro (and obviously make the focused points work).

MWD and something else (istabs/nomads) works fine for titans to avoid this.

The basic thing CCP need to answer is - are you ok with people taking damage, being killable at login or not. If not - backtrack on masterplan's change and make them invulnerable, if yes then make it so that you can cancel ewarp on aggro.
Lugia3
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2013-11-28 20:59:21 UTC
...

I taught that.

"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
Frederick Garrish
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2013-11-28 21:00:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Frederick Garrish
RoCkEt X wrote:
Firefox4312 Yatolila wrote:


So, CCP definitely needs to go through these mechanics and fix them as well as deem this as an exploit. Because if they flat out say it's not, that gives people like PL and PHEW the ability to do this without worrying about a ban at all.

My suggestion would be to do something along the lines of making any Super class hull a "Large Collidable Object" on login, so if anything does land on it to bump it, the super will act similar to POS towers, Stargates, Stations, and won't be affected by the bumps. This should only be limited to the ewarp phase itself, and once it's out of ewarp, that status condition (if you can call it that) should be gone, so the titan acts like it always has when bumps come into account.



Since joining PL, i've chatted with several FC's, several of which were already aware of the mechanic, but ALL of them considered it to be at least a 'grey area' if not plainly an exploit.

While PHEW no longer exists, the members have since joined PL, the former PHEW pilots are a mere fraction of the people within PL capable of pulling this off with relative ease.

Previously, this was only possible to use against titans (except the ragnarok, which warps too fast anyway) because of the warp speed changes, it can now be used against any supercapital. Using MWD's will work for supers (to get into warp in 10 seconds, but not for titans, which take 2 cycles. While the mechanics stand as they currently are, it is not possible to safely log in any supercapital ship.



SOLUTION:
My proposal for a solution was simple. When you undock for example, you have an invulnerability timer for 30 seconds. During this timer, you cannot be bumped or locked. The invulnerability is terminated when you activate a module, and allows you to be bumped.

The simplest solution to this would be to make ships that are logging in and warping back to their log-off spots invulnerable, until they land out of warp. This means, that in the e-warp spot, the ship would be unlock-able, unbumpable. Resolving the current issues completely.



Thoughts?
-Rock



It seems, if you believe what's read here, which I do, as it makes perfect sense, all the other entities that could do this did the responsible thing and contacted CCP first and got varied replies that basically have one thing in common. "This needs to be investigated, but we will most likely consider it an exploit so don't so it," so they don't. I think this is an obvious exploit, but I am glad someone actually did it, as it will lead to changes, which is why I quoted this dude. Think this is a very simple and effective fix, and I think it would be much more well received then say making it so you can stop your warp and fight back, but the latter is obviously why I think it's an exploit.
RoCkEt X
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#91 - 2013-11-28 21:01:23 UTC  |  Edited by: RoCkEt X
W0wbagger wrote:
RoCkEt X wrote:


Since joining PL, i've chatted with several FC's, several of which were already aware of the mechanic, but ALL of them considered it to be at least a 'grey area' if not plainly an exploit.

While PHEW no longer exists, the members have since joined PL, the former PHEW pilots are a mere fraction of the people within PL capable of pulling this off with relative ease.

Previously, this was only possible to use against titans (except the ragnarok, which warps too fast anyway) because of the warp speed changes, it can now be used against any supercapital. Using MWD's will work for supers (to get into warp in 10 seconds, but not for titans, which take 2 cycles. While the mechanics stand as they currently are, it is not possible to safely log in any supercapital ship.


SOLUTION:
My proposal for a solution was simple. When you undock for example, you have an invulnerability timer for 30 seconds. During this timer, you cannot be bumped or locked. The invulnerability is terminated when you activate a module, and allows you to be bumped.

The simplest solution to this would be to make ships that are logging in and warping back to their log-off spots invulnerable, until they land out of warp. This means, that in the e-warp spot, the ship would be unlock-able, unbumpable. Resolving the current issues completely.



Thoughts?
-Rock



It's a possible solution but one that backtracks from what CCP presumably spent time and money implementing (modifying bubbles to work on ewarp login spots, as per masterplan's post).
If CCP want to retain this functionality then the other solution would be to make ewarp cancel upon aggro (and obviously make the focused points work).

MWD and something else (istabs/nomads) works fine for titans to avoid this.

The basic thing CCP need to answer is - are you ok with people taking damage, being killable at login or not. If not - backtrack on masterplan's change and make them invulnerable, if yes then make it so that you can cancel ewarp on aggro.


you do realise, that while them modifying bubbles so that they do work is in the patch notes, it was never actually done. (Because we tested it, before we worked out we had to bump the target to stop it warping).

While masterplan is quite correct in his research, the patch notes are actually inaccurate, and do not reflect the actual changes made, and thus aren't relevant

EDIT (further comment): The other problem is not simply that you can be shot and such, it's that you cannot actually be tackled - cannot stop your warp and therefore cannot fight back, for example activating cyno's etc. Allowing super pilots the ability to stop warp when aggro'd is a no-no because it can be abused. Example: my POS is bubbled, i log my titan in, probe it, warp to it and fire a shot - thus gaining aggro, stop my ship and jump out from my e-warp spot.
W0wbagger
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#92 - 2013-11-28 21:07:24 UTC  |  Edited by: W0wbagger
Of course, so do they fix the game or change the intention? I think the former is closer to the "Eve mantra"

Presumably if they spent the development time and added it to the patch notes then didn't put it in - they should.
I'd be pretty annoyed if they put a new ship in the notes and it just wasnt there. Obviously you are not a fan of the mechanic but does that mean it shouldnt be implemented? (Properly this time).

In response to your edit - if you are warping to your own titan and shooting it to aggro it - anyone else can too. Not ideal though admitedly, but we are discussing a feature that was meant to have been in the game for 18months, I guess no one got upset then as it didn't work and no one tried it barring some petitions to GMs who potentially didn't really understand the implication anyway.
RoCkEt X
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#93 - 2013-11-28 21:33:45 UTC  |  Edited by: RoCkEt X
W0wbagger wrote:
Of course, so do they fix the game or change the intention? I think the former is closer to the "Eve mantra"

Presumably if they spent the development time and added it to the patch notes then didn't put it in - they should.
I'd be pretty annoyed if they put a new ship in the notes and it just wasnt there. Obviously you are not a fan of the mechanic but does that mean it shouldnt be implemented? (Properly this time).

In response to your edit - if you are warping to your own titan and shooting it to aggro it - anyone else can too. Not ideal though admitedly, but we are discussing a feature that was meant to have been in the game for 18months, I guess no one got upset then as it didn't work and no one tried it barring some petitions to GMs who potentially didn't really understand the implication anyway.


My edit concerns the suggestion that titan pilots should be able to abort their e-warps when they get aggro, and that it could be abused.

Aside from that, your point is somewhat moot, considering this occured in lowsec, where you can't launch bubbles anyway. But still - i understand what you mean, the patch notes imply that they are meant to be tackle-able.

To pull something like this off you:
*Had to know that tackling it with a HIC would not work, otherwise, why bump it?
*Therefore had to be aware that CCP did not intend for you to be able to kill the target.
*Were aware your actions could possibly be classed as an exploit.
Kashmyta
HC - gizmos Gizco
#94 - 2013-11-28 21:47:58 UTC
W0wbagger wrote:
Of course, so do they fix the game or change the intention? I think the former is closer to the "Eve mantra"

Presumably if they spent the development time and added it to the patch notes then didn't put it in - they should.
I'd be pretty annoyed if they put a new ship in the notes and it just wasnt there. Obviously you are not a fan of the mechanic but does that mean it shouldnt be implemented? (Properly this time).

In response to your edit - if you are warping to your own titan and shooting it to aggro it - anyone else can too. Not ideal though admitedly, but we are discussing a feature that was meant to have been in the game for 18months, I guess no one got upset then as it didn't work and no one tried it barring some petitions to GMs who potentially didn't really understand the implication anyway.



You guys knew that this (bumping to stop e-warp) had been petitioned though right? and that GM's had apparently said that this was not allowed??
W0wbagger
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#95 - 2013-11-28 21:49:27 UTC
Conjecture on our intentions is meaningless - and not really the point of this discussion we brought hics and it's standard practice to bump while lighting a cyno so the hics have a chance to lock, however:

In this case it died in about 20 seconds - 7 of our dreads didn't get on the mail - the first dread (moros) got 4 volleys off. It was only bumped once.

Quote:
Therefore had to be aware that CCP did not intend for you to be able to kill the target."


Actually, I am aware from CCP Masterplans post that CCP do intend for me to be able to kill targets at login, hence I assumed the hic point not working was a bug, and used other means to interdict the target's warp. Being in lowsec, bumping seems like a good option.

If there is a bug here it is that ewarp is not cancelled by hic point.
W0wbagger
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#96 - 2013-11-28 21:51:22 UTC
Kashmyta wrote:
W0wbagger wrote:
Of course, so do they fix the game or change the intention? I think the former is closer to the "Eve mantra"

Presumably if they spent the development time and added it to the patch notes then didn't put it in - they should.
I'd be pretty annoyed if they put a new ship in the notes and it just wasnt there. Obviously you are not a fan of the mechanic but does that mean it shouldnt be implemented? (Properly this time).

In response to your edit - if you are warping to your own titan and shooting it to aggro it - anyone else can too. Not ideal though admitedly, but we are discussing a feature that was meant to have been in the game for 18months, I guess no one got upset then as it didn't work and no one tried it barring some petitions to GMs who potentially didn't really understand the implication anyway.



You guys knew that this (bumping to stop e-warp) had been petitioned though right? and that GM's had apparently said that this was not allowed??


No of course not! This all came out after that all these guys had petitioned it.
Allison A'vani
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#97 - 2013-11-28 21:59:07 UTC
Seems pretty simple to me, if it feels gray area then don't do it, or at least petition a GM first. This is common scene.
Matt Emery
State War Academy
Caldari State
#98 - 2013-11-28 23:06:26 UTC
If you log at a pos, you should come back at a pos...

I mean, a pos has guns and will defend you, in space your all alone...
effectively logging off looses all your advantages of setting up a pos :/

I just want a CCP answer on this, but I think being tackled and killed in an E-Warp spot is bullshit :/
Firefox4312 Yatolila
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#99 - 2013-11-28 23:56:55 UTC
RoCkEt X wrote:
Firefox4312 Yatolila wrote:


So, CCP definitely needs to go through these mechanics and fix them as well as deem this as an exploit. Because if they flat out say it's not, that gives people like PL and PHEW the ability to do this without worrying about a ban at all.

My suggestion would be to do something along the lines of making any Super class hull a "Large Collidable Object" on login, so if anything does land on it to bump it, the super will act similar to POS towers, Stargates, Stations, and won't be affected by the bumps. This should only be limited to the ewarp phase itself, and once it's out of ewarp, that status condition (if you can call it that) should be gone, so the titan acts like it always has when bumps come into account.



Since joining PL, i've chatted with several FC's, several of which were already aware of the mechanic, but ALL of them considered it to be at least a 'grey area' if not plainly an exploit.

While PHEW no longer exists, the members have since joined PL, the former PHEW pilots are a mere fraction of the people within PL capable of pulling this off with relative ease.

Previously, this was only possible to use against titans (except the ragnarok, which warps too fast anyway) because of the warp speed changes, it can now be used against any supercapital. Using MWD's will work for supers (to get into warp in 10 seconds, but not for titans, which take 2 cycles. While the mechanics stand as they currently are, it is not possible to safely log in any supercapital ship.



SOLUTION:
My proposal for a solution was simple. When you undock for example, you have an invulnerability timer for 30 seconds. During this timer, you cannot be bumped or locked. The invulnerability is terminated when you activate a module, and allows you to be bumped.

The simplest solution to this would be to make ships that are logging in and warping back to their log-off spots invulnerable, until they land out of warp. This means, that in the e-warp spot, the ship would be unlock-able, unbumpable. Resolving the current issues completely.



Thoughts?
-Rock


That would be along the lines of what I had said, with giving supers a status condition on login that disallows them to be bumped, and they're treated like Stations, Stargates, etc.. until the warp activates, once there you have the normal mechanics be taken into concern. Bubbles on poses won't stop the ewarp, etc.. and it gives a safe time to activate hardeners (if combat fit), and would disallow this blatant exploit to happen.

Even though CCP isn't calling it an exploit, it acts like one, and CCP devs should take a look into this mechanic to determine if exploitable or not. And if it is deemed an exploit, CCP should rework the mechanics behind ewarp to fix this.

As per the titan that was lost, which I think most everyone realizes it was bumped in an ewarp (hics on grid or not), that titan should be refunded if CCP does deem this mechanic an exploit, because if you lose something because of an exploit, it's the GM's job to make sure that doesn't happen.
John Caffeine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2013-11-29 02:06:24 UTC
W0wbagger wrote:
Kashmyta wrote:
W0wbagger wrote:
Of course, so do they fix the game or change the intention? I think the former is closer to the "Eve mantra"

Presumably if they spent the development time and added it to the patch notes then didn't put it in - they should.
I'd be pretty annoyed if they put a new ship in the notes and it just wasnt there. Obviously you are not a fan of the mechanic but does that mean it shouldnt be implemented? (Properly this time).

In response to your edit - if you are warping to your own titan and shooting it to aggro it - anyone else can too. Not ideal though admitedly, but we are discussing a feature that was meant to have been in the game for 18months, I guess no one got upset then as it didn't work and no one tried it barring some petitions to GMs who potentially didn't really understand the implication anyway.



You guys knew that this (bumping to stop e-warp) had been petitioned though right? and that GM's had apparently said that this was not allowed??


No of course not! This all came out after that all these guys had petitioned it.


It's your own responsibility to petition tactics in the "gray area" and ask if it's an exploit or not before attempting it. I really hope for your sake you guys did that and a GM responded with "it's cool".

As for Masterplan's post, the only part of "bubbling at e-warp" that was ever actually implemented was the change where you won't e-warp out if your ship is already tackled when logging in. That means it's already agressed and tackled on login; i.e you log out while agressed, ship gets tackled in e-warp spot and you stay there when you log back in (before the change you'd just warp out of the bubbles). It seemed pretty clear to me at least that they decided not to implement what Masterplan mentioned, that they didn't want ships killed in e-warp spots while logging in (and not just relogging) and the fact that you couldn't point them at login-ewarp spots made it pretty clear.

The fact that the pilot would be unable to control his ship in any fashion beyond mods like hardeners is pretty damning on it's own. That's the same reason CCP deemed the freighter webbing an exploit: the freighter lost all control of his ship and couldn't cancel warp. So yeah, unless you guys actually did petition it (and got an ok from a GM), it really looks like you figured it would be deemed an exploit and decided to go ahead and just use it under the arguments "CCP hasn't issued a statement saying it's an exploit" and "this one Dev post from 2012 regarding mechanics that were never implemented and as such is entirely irrelevant said it was cool". Because anyone with half a brain would realize it's at least in the dark-grey area and that it should be petitioned first.


CCP Guard wrote:
Not everybody knows this but we've always encouraged players to contact our GMs through support tickets before doing something they think MIGHT be an exploit. This is a no-strings-attached service to help you stay on the right side of things while enjoying the fruits of your creativity. Our GMs will give you a ruling on whether you can proceed or not, and all communication is of course in full confidence.


In a situation like this, when it's somewhere between "probably" and "almost certainly" an exploit, I'd say going ahead and using a tactic under the assumption it's ok until there's a public statement saying it isn't is a bold move indeed. I look forward to seeing if it pays off for you guys, and to see if CCP rules it a legit tactic or exploit.

(Btw I'm secretly rooting for you guys hoping they're cool with it 'cause holy **** dead supers/caps everwhere, I just strongly dislike being told I'm not allowed to do something only to see someone not bothering to ask get away with it. Which is basicly just CCP punishing the rest of us for checking with GMs first.)