These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Can assisted drones get their owners CONCORDDOKKENED?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2014-04-04 18:06:46 UTC
CCP Lebowski wrote:
Hey folks,

This didn't seem right to me, so I've done some investigating, and happily have been unable to reproduce this issue. Of course, if anyone comes across this themselves and can provide more specifics as to the date and time it occurred then I can look into it further, but unless that happens I'm more than happy to say that this is simply quite a nice little urban legend.

For future reference (Or for anyone interested in how the drone assist mechanics are currently designed), the general rule is that combat drones will only consider characters that are personally legal targets for their owner when deciding to instigate an unforced attack. Targets that are not a personally legal target, or targets that are merely 'globally legal' such as outlaws, suspects and criminals will never be valid unforced targets.

TL:DR - A drone will not trigger a limited engagement or criminal/suspect flag, unless explicitly instructed to engage a target. (This only applies in high/low sec)

I hope this clears things up!

Would the person that the drones are set to assist starting a duel before affect the interaction?

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
CCP Lebowski
C C P
C C P Alliance
#22 - 2014-04-04 18:18:03 UTC
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:
Would the person that the drones are set to assist starting a duel before affect the interaction?
The drones will only consider engagements between their owner and the target, and not the person they are assisting, so no, this wouldn't make any difference to the interaction.

CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0

@CCP_Lebowski

Markku Laaksonen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#23 - 2014-04-04 23:36:37 UTC
Just to add a quick note, a lot of people are saying 'if you get CONCORDed with green safeties, petition it." That should say "if you get CONCORDed and your safety isn't red, petition it." The only way you can get CONCORDed is if you are in hi sec with red safeties. Yellow safeties prevent you from being CONCORDed.

DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/

EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#24 - 2014-04-05 01:19:48 UTC
You've been fed the Eve equivalent of a story told by a fisherman. It gets believed and passed around as urban space legend, because most people in those highsec "we do everything!" corps don't understand why it doesn't work.

I still see unironic corp bulletins telling people to set drones to passive or you might get concorded.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Luscius Uta
#25 - 2014-04-05 11:29:48 UTC
If this story were serious, then drone assist would work in lowsec.
So it's just another attempt to scare the highsec pubbies.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#26 - 2014-04-06 01:33:29 UTC
The troll is strong with this one.

OP has succeeded in causing several people to waste time trying to reproduce this.

Well played, GF, etc.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Teochoilae
Red Circle of Death
#27 - 2014-04-06 08:23:39 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Mom! MOM! I spotted another one who doesn't know what PvP means!! That's two in a day! WOW!


Well said!
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#28 - 2014-04-06 09:06:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Imiarr Timshae
CCP Lebowski wrote:
Hey folks,

This didn't seem right to me, so I've done some investigating, and happily have been unable to reproduce this issue. Of course, if anyone comes across this themselves and can provide more specifics as to the date and time it occurred then I can look into it further, but unless that happens I'm more than happy to say that this is simply quite a nice little urban legend.

For future reference (Or for anyone interested in how the drone assist mechanics are currently designed), the general rule is that combat drones will only consider characters that are personally legal targets for their owner when deciding to instigate an unforced attack. Targets that are not a personally legal target, or targets that are merely 'globally legal' such as outlaws, suspects and criminals will never be valid unforced targets.

TL:DR - A drone will not trigger a limited engagement or criminal/suspect flag, unless explicitly instructed to engage a target. (This only applies in high/low sec)

I hope this clears things up!


This isn't true.

Player A deploys a MTU and then Garde II's

Player B gains a suspect flag by shooting Player A's MTU.

Player A's drones automatically (if set to "aggressive) engage Player B.

Limited Engagement begins.

Player A's drones have instigated an unforced attack against a "globally legal" target with a suspect flag without explict instruction to do so.

Personal Standings Services - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - 7+ Day Old Corps for Highsec POS Sales
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#29 - 2014-04-06 09:15:03 UTC
Imiarr Timshae wrote:


This isn't true.

Player A deploys a MTU and then Garde II's

Player B gains a suspect flag by shooting Player A's MTU.

Player A's drones automatically (if set to "aggressive) engage Player B.

Limited Engagement begins.

Player A's drones have instigated an unforced attack against a "globally legal" target with a suspect flag without explict instruction to do so.


This behaviour should no longer exist since a patch was put in place to stop it.

If you can replicate it on the live server currently, then bug report it and message Lebowski about it as well.
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#30 - 2014-04-06 09:21:17 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Imiarr Timshae wrote:


This isn't true.

Player A deploys a MTU and then Garde II's

Player B gains a suspect flag by shooting Player A's MTU.

Player A's drones automatically (if set to "aggressive) engage Player B.

Limited Engagement begins.

Player A's drones have instigated an unforced attack against a "globally legal" target with a suspect flag without explict instruction to do so.


This behaviour should no longer exist since a patch was put in place to stop it.

If you can replicate it on the live server currently, then bug report it and message Lebowski about it as well.


I was not up to date! Big smile Do you have a link to the patch notes/rough estimation of when this was patched out?

I retract my statement aimed at Lebowski as I have become enlightened :)

Personal Standings Services - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - 7+ Day Old Corps for Highsec POS Sales
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#31 - 2014-04-06 09:22:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Destination SkillQueue
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Imiarr Timshae wrote:


This isn't true.

Player A deploys a MTU and then Garde II's

Player B gains a suspect flag by shooting Player A's MTU.

Player A's drones automatically (if set to "aggressive) engage Player B.

Limited Engagement begins.

Player A's drones have instigated an unforced attack against a "globally legal" target with a suspect flag without explict instruction to do so.


This behaviour should no longer exist since a patch was put in place to stop it.

If you can replicate it on the live server currently, then bug report it and message Lebowski about it as well.

This. It was fixed months ago.

Imiarr Timshae wrote:
I was not up to date! Big smile Do you have a link to the patch notes/rough estimation of when this was patched out?

I retract my statement aimed at Lebowski as I have become enlightened :)


I think this is the one.
Quote:
Patch notes for EVE Online: Rubicon 1.1
Released on Tuesday, January 28th 2014

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.
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#32 - 2014-04-06 09:31:20 UTC
Thanks to both of you.

It's suprisingly easy to miss the important patch notes Big smile

Personal Standings Services - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - 7+ Day Old Corps for Highsec POS Sales
Jessica Duranin
Doomheim
#33 - 2014-04-06 09:57:24 UTC
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
Thanks to both of you.

It's suprisingly easy to miss the important patch notes Big smile

It's more surprising how you could miss all the whine threads filled with tears from highsec 'PvPers' when this was patched.
Ms Kat
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2014-04-06 10:16:49 UTC
This would only work if the 7 or 8 members in the original fleet had safety set to red. If they did they deserved all they got imo.

Before the whole safety system this could be done, not only with drones but with remote sebo's, remote tracking computers etc, if assigned to someone, said someone could go criminal dragging all "helping" into the concordokken party
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#35 - 2014-04-07 00:15:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
Ms Kat wrote:
This would only work if the 7 or 8 members in the original fleet had safety set to red. If they did they deserved all they got imo.

Before the whole safety system this could be done, not only with drones but with remote sebo's, remote tracking computers etc, if assigned to someone, said someone could go criminal dragging all "helping" into the concordokken party


Nope.

This has never worked with drones. 'Assistance' modules used to infer GCC before Incursion 1.1 (or thereabouts) but outside of, perhaps, a couple of patch day bugs, this has never been intended gameplay, or something you could make happen.

Much like "drones on aggressive will engage can flippers!" it's highsec-hearsay.

e: for clarity, you could do this if you got someone to put their logi drones on you. This was the best way of getting a whole incursion to go GCC, convince everyone logi drones are amazing, and get the battleships to get them on logistics.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#36 - 2014-04-07 00:24:45 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

If they were on green that's a faulty game mechanic, and they should be reimbursed.



safeties are a faulty mechanic imo

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#37 - 2014-04-07 00:38:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Khanh'rhh wrote:


Nope.

This has never worked with drones. 'Assistance' modules used to infer GCC before Incursion 1.1 (or thereabouts) but outside of, perhaps, a couple of patch day bugs, this has never been intended gameplay, or something you could make happen.

Much like "drones on aggressive will engage can flippers!" it's highsec-hearsay.

Actually post Crimewatch 2.0 till a very recent patch Drones on aggressive would engage suspects who fired at your property. Mainly known as the MTU exploit. And a number of shiny ships went down in a very short time period to that unintended behaviour till word got around. Then CCP fixed it.

As for you A.M.
Well, HTFU, CCP disagrees with you on that one. :P
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#38 - 2014-04-07 00:59:19 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:


Nope.

This has never worked with drones. 'Assistance' modules used to infer GCC before Incursion 1.1 (or thereabouts) but outside of, perhaps, a couple of patch day bugs, this has never been intended gameplay, or something you could make happen.

Much like "drones on aggressive will engage can flippers!" it's highsec-hearsay.

Actually post Crimewatch 2.0 till a very recent patch Drones on aggressive would engage suspects who fired at your property. Mainly known as the MTU exploit. And a number of shiny ships went down in a very short time period to that unintended behaviour till word got around. Then CCP fixed it.

As for you A.M.
Well, HTFU, CCP disagrees with you on that one. :P


Can your MTU be shot and looted without the guy shooting/looting be flagged a criminal and allow you to kill him?

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#39 - 2014-04-07 02:04:38 UTC
On a related note who fits their ships with 7b worth of mods to do high-sec level 4s?


Who has an entire corp like this?


Where do I sign up?
Previous page12