EVE General Discussion

Is it possible for players (wihth no roles) to apply suddenly in a corporation in war so as to trap other players. I mean is it ok for CCP or is it considered as an exploit ?

I have seen that a couples of times, and actually I'm wardec by a small corporation with several (ex)members switchin constantly In/out between 2 corporations). So I was wondering if its tolerated by CCp as a normal game mechanic, before undocking with a full bunch of PLEX in my cargohold :)

thanks for reading

Even "better", your tags don't always update when someone leaves a corp you're a war with until you relog, but if you shoot them ... CONCORDOKKEN.

Best wardec their other corp, just to be on the safe side.

Yep I was thinking about that : apply in space, at a gate suddenly … okie thanks for responses buds

I can certainly say that since the introduction of the more lapse war-dec manipulation (which will allow corps/alliances to create war-dec immunity) I will probably be taking some time out next year to work out a fake dec-shield scam system.

I hope to find and destroy a smug hi-sec corp that tries to avoid wars.

Edit: Any kind of war is not an optional part of EVE. If you play EVE, you are playing for war.

because of falcon

So...does this mean that KICKING a player from a corp while fighting in space is also an exploit?

IE:

1. 'Mr. Corp Ganker' infiltrates a corp. Ganker has no roles.
2. 'Mr. Corp Ganker' attempts to kill 'Mr. Carebear Director' in a Jump Freighter.
3. Scrammed and into Hull, 'Mr. Carebear Director' decides to kick the ganker from the corp.
4. Ganker gets Concorded, Jump Freighter gets away.

And no, this has never happened to me, but it DOES happen, and I see nothing within game mechanics to prevent it.

So:

A) Is this an exploit - and if not, why not?
Its basically changing the rules of combat in MID-combat. Very similar to WT corp switching 'exploit' - but WORSE as it leads to Concord death - without a pop-up warning...and soon, no insurance. (Popups and module auto-shutoff patches are high priority for Incursion-bears, but not for the rest of us, I suppose...)

B) If it IS an exploit, how can a simple petition make this situation right?

- Mr. Corp Ganker can probably petition to get his Concorded ship back - but he was denied the kill and all the effort that went into it. The 'exploiting Carebear Director' gets to keep his 6 Billion ISK ship + cargo. Hell, thats probably worth a 3-7 day ban....

C) How can this sort of situation be fixed in an equitable manner?

Banning Mr. Carebear Director is probably not the way to go - but a 'slap on the wrist' is not appropriate either.

Perhaps a One Hour timer to join or kick members from a corporation.

- This would remove all 'tactical combat' abuse of 'corp switching'.

Prevents 'instant' changes in state, while not overly inconveniencing the ordinary flow of members in and out of corps. Would massively cut down on petitions, AND the code for these timers already exist (ie, removing roles).

Any reason why this would be a bad way to go?

Infiltrating a corp and getting roles and wallet/hangar access is generally a far more involved process, and involves grinding and actually getting to know the people in your 'adopted' corp. Not all corp infiltrators are that patient.

Searching for juicy freighters in medium-sized corps, sometimes with billions in cargo - or a Marauder with billions in mods - it can be accomplished with a minimal investment in time - as 'aggression within corp' does not require roles or waiting for anything except the target to be in a vulnerable position.

A Nomad JF is worth 6 Billion - and losing one is devastating for many carebears. Even a regular freighter, dropping a Billion or two in cargo isn't bad. Hard to see how getting such a kill in high-sec - and instantly making hundreds of millions or billions would be something to be ashamed of.

Further, a timer would fix the other problem as well - (ie, insta war-status exploit) at the same time - resulting in far less petitions. (And isn't that why they decided to change the rules on alliance hopping? To reduce petition load - even at the cost of it making high-sec POSes invulnerable and wardecs pointless?

You realize that you cant kick a member if he is not docked, right?

Fair enough. You certainly know your deal.

Ok this is a good discussion but will mostly be trolled soon.



Hi GM Homonoia,

You are aware of your exploit happening all the time with war decks and that it is also impossible to accuse someone of it even though there are doing it, due to something called evidence.

Our corp has been at war many times, we have camped war targets in bottle neck systems to stop the war targets fleet from grouping up etc. The war targets corp i speak of was a greifer corp that had war decked our corp, we were trying to prevent their small player base from grouping up because they were good. They also had neutral logisitc alts which should be changed to be honest.

Anyways to the point.
They just left their corp to pass the system we were camping to then group up then rejoin their corp, would this be classed as an exploit?

I petitioned this and was told it was not and exploit.