These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Issues, Workarounds & Localization

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Warning : Mobile Tractor Unit

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#221 - 2014-01-20 07:49:37 UTC
I only deployed an MTU once on SiSi, but doesnt it warn you that aggressive drones will defend it?
Sweetest Mowi
Blaupausen Kompetenz Agentur
#222 - 2014-01-22 11:49:29 UTC
A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.

Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug.
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#223 - 2014-01-22 12:00:35 UTC
Sweetest Mowi wrote:
A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.

Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug.

Why do we have to wait days before a GM or CCP dev make an official respond to these case?

Once again the Internet Layer Fools are going on and on about "the dev blog said this", "the GM said that" , blablabla...

And in the end, it is ONLY CCP who can make a judgment on what is right and what is not.


As it is now, people should just bet on these issues while awaiting the official CCP response: A decade of experience with this game makes me put 10 M ISK on, that this drone behavior is NOT intended by CCP.

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
#224 - 2014-01-23 01:31:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Sniper Wolf18
Sweetest Mowi wrote:
A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.

Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug.


Well that's rather disappointing.

I guess CCP's 2014 plan is "Have your cake and eat it too! AFK mission run all you want, we've even made this handy little device that does even more work for you"
I guess the people who make bots for MMOs will be going out of business soon. Roll

I've already said it before in this thread and I guess I'll sound like a 'bitter vet' by saying it again, but previous systems have allowed players to be attacked without prior knowledge that they could be shot at (Lofty scam), this was an unintended game mechanic and was patched eventually, but ships were NEVER reimbursed. What's changed now? By reimbursing these ships you're sending the message that running missions while AFK and not paying attention is perfectly fine, wanting to mission and have all your wrecks vacuumed up into a neat pile is great too, after all, the more ISK you make the more PLEX you can buy, right?
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#225 - 2014-01-23 21:30:47 UTC
Sniper Wolf18 wrote:

I guess CCP's 2014 plan is "Have your cake and eat it too! AFK mission run all you want, we've even made this handy little device that does even more work for you"...blah...blah... By reimbursing these ships you're sending the message that running missions while AFK and not paying attention is perfectly fine, wanting to mission and have all your wrecks vacuumed up into a neat pile is great too, after all, the more ISK you make the more PLEX you can buy, right?

Again, this has nothing to do with being AFK, as it can happen to a pilot who is very much active and at the keyboard. The timing for this to happen can be nearly instantly...if the aggressor happens to shoot the MTU the second before the players drones kill a target...there is almost nothing the player can do between those two actions to prevent this from happening.

I've watched it happen with my own eyes. Dude came into a mission me and my bro were doing, he flew in as suspect already (from previous target i'm guessing), he started to shoot my bro's MTU, so he scooped it before dude could pop it. But by the time that was done, he was already in an LE. With some luck we got him out unscathed. But the point is the same. And btw, again, the only other ways players can aggress another persons stuff in a manner in which draws the drones defensive aggro...gets you Concorded. So the five minute LE from that drone aggro is countered by the 15 minute criminal flag

Drones on aggressive does not mean AFK. It simply means, i only have X-number of target slots, and i don't want to spend 10-20 seconds to lock a new frigate after my drones have killed the last one.

PS: Have you actually tried to USE one of these MTU's? They are so slow they can take upwards of 30 minutes to 'clear' a room. Most of the time they are dropped, then forgot about till after the mission is turned in...or even after the next. 1k/sec tractor beam grabbing wrecks 50k away with 10 second 'switching' delay...times 30 wrecks...yup...30 minutes.
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
#226 - 2014-01-23 23:00:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Sniper Wolf18
asteroidjas wrote:
Sniper Wolf18 wrote:

I guess CCP's 2014 plan is "Have your cake and eat it too! AFK mission run all you want, we've even made this handy little device that does even more work for you"...blah...blah... By reimbursing these ships you're sending the message that running missions while AFK and not paying attention is perfectly fine, wanting to mission and have all your wrecks vacuumed up into a neat pile is great too, after all, the more ISK you make the more PLEX you can buy, right?

Again, this has nothing to do with being AFK, as it can happen to a pilot who is very much active and at the keyboard. The timing for this to happen can be nearly instantly...if the aggressor happens to shoot the MTU the second before the players drones kill a target...there is almost nothing the player can do between those two actions to prevent this from happening.


This can be prevented from happening by turning your drones to passive, watching D-scan, pulling your MTU the instant you see someone warp into your mission or by having an alt drop the MTU for you. If you fail to do all those four things and your drones aggro someone, you can have an alt/friend in a BB/falcon warp in and ECM them. This is not an unstoppable bug, all it requires is that you pay attention and not be stupid.
You complain that you don't have enough target slots, but that's just another admission that you're lazy and don't want to have to lock targets every few seconds and would rather use CCP's built in botting systems with impunity. You claim that it's possible for someone to shoot your MTU the second a rat pops and have your drones aggress them. This is such an unlikely situation that it borders on impossible, unless you are ignoring the person who's just warped into your mission, started to approach your drones (they attack whatever is closest) and then started shooting your MTU, unless you'

Ships were never reimbursed due to losses from mechanics similar to this, such as the lofty scam, which allowed you to be shot just by accepting a fleet invite, there was no warning. This is no different, why should CCP start reimbursing ships now.

CCP - Carebear concession people?


EDIT:
I got talking with a 2 day old player this evening and showed him how to check for ships killed and stuff and how to avoid certain lowsec systems. When asking on how to be safest in highsec I mentioned that having an MTU out at the same time as having drones out would be a bad idea. He understood immediately that drones would attack whoever was attacking an MTU, I didn't even mention drones have an aggressive/passive mode. When I did and mentioned this thread, he was shocked how players playing for months, even years, didn't understand this would happen. He was appauled at the fact that people were calling for this feature's removal and that ships were being reimbursed, asking what was so hard about having to lock targets and do some fecking work for once.
TL;DR - 2 day old noob knows this would happen - Seasoned carebears are still clueless
Je'ron
The Happy Shooters
#227 - 2014-01-27 20:23:59 UTC
Jowen Datloran wrote:
Sweetest Mowi wrote:
A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.

Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug.

Why do we have to wait days before a GM or CCP dev make an official respond to these case?

Once again the Internet Layer Fools are going on and on about "the dev blog said this", "the GM said that" , blablabla...

And in the end, it is ONLY CCP who can make a judgment on what is right and what is not.


As it is now, people should just bet on these issues while awaiting the official CCP response: A decade of experience with this game makes me put 10 M ISK on, that this drone behavior is NOT intended by CCP.


I think CCP dev have made their view on this very clear
From the Patch notes for Rubicon 1.1, which is to be release tomorrow
Quote:
Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target.
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
#228 - 2014-01-27 22:04:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Sniper Wolf18
Interesting, now that CCP are fixing inherent issues with drones can they fix all the other disparities with drones too, such as no drone implants, no overheating for drones, etc? Or is it just the problems with drones that make bears angry that get fixed?
Je'ron
The Happy Shooters
#229 - 2014-01-27 23:13:03 UTC
lol, with a couple of people tried to remember when drones weren't broken, must have been before boot.ini. Got a couple more for you: the Drone UI in general, no drone health display when in bay (keep on launching those near death drones), no T2 resists on T2 drones, heavies being obsolete except for very, very close combat, ECM drones icw stacking penalty
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#230 - 2014-01-28 10:42:16 UTC
Sweetest Mowi wrote:
A GM answered my Petition and gave me my lost ship back.

Dunno if it is catigororized as an exploit, but it seems at least to be a bug.

refunding you the ship is the exploit, drones set as agressive, i you are to dumb to understand what that means, well set them to passive.


/me now waiting for the inevitable "but huuuu then they won't run my mission themselv duh!"
Kalu Alar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#231 - 2014-01-28 15:16:45 UTC
As per patch Rubicon 1.1 notes:

Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target.

/thread
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#232 - 2014-01-28 17:04:56 UTC
yeah, even more dumbing eve down.........Roll
Sniper Wolf18
Aggressive Diplomacy
#233 - 2014-01-28 21:04:57 UTC
This makes me rather sad tbh, star citizen probably won't be an unforgiving PvP game, not with as many backers as it has now, they'll have to cater to the casual/dumb masses too. EvE online used to be an uncompromising and unforgiving PvP game, I don't know what to think now, I guess most of the highsec PvP crowd feel the same and don't want to unsub and ragequit as there's nowhere else to go, at least, that's how I feel now anyway. Sad
Thomas Mayaki
Perkone
Caldari State
#234 - 2014-02-02 11:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Thomas Mayaki
Kalu Alar wrote:
As per patch Rubicon 1.1 notes:

Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target.

/thread


Does that mean if I have ecm drones out on a mining barges they won't work automatically on aggression?

Also won't that mean mining barges no longer create 'killmails ' when they get ganked?
DSpite Culhach
#235 - 2014-02-10 15:04:29 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
One can argue and troll over "bug, exploit or intended mechanic" semantics all you want, reality is that it's outright silly for someone set to "green" entering a limited engagement while not actively having chosen to do so. The whole "well don't set to aggressive then" is a similar fallacy as "afk cloakers are no threat" bullshit.

It's obviously an oversight by CCP because they don't really do any sort of combat. pvp or QA.

I will give you a Nyx if you show me where an AFK cloaker killed someone.


AFK cloaker was in a fleet. The FC did a fleet warp, then cancelled it and asked everyone else to cancel it also.
The AFK cloaker covops warped anyway, and landed on grid 500 meters away from a T1 battleship that was also cloaked up, in a ratting belt, decloakign both ships. Local rats target the Battleship, web/scram it and it dies.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.