EVE General Discussion

If this is an exploit then so is ISBoxer

Yeah, no. But you're welcome to try. Hint: The difficulty for you is that the CFC, N3, and PL own most of the moons worth siphoning, and the CFC and PL have a treaty thereby limiting your potential targets further.

Additionally, while small entity reaction towers can be siphoned, the intel on the location of those towers is pretty nonexistent. You have to go and physically find them. The intel resources on R64s and R32s are massive and ever improving, which again, makes R64 and R32 moons owned by the CFC, N3, and PL the primary targets.

Which is why I find this type of behavior from ccp (if it isn't an oversight) quite disappointing, as elaborated here and here.

While I'm not super well versed in this, wouldn't that also remove legitimate functionality?

It would remove the functionality in showing how much is currently stored in a given silo. In effect, you would have to log in on an alt (or main) to check how much goo is stored in a silo.

I suppose actually logging on and checking a silo is pretty hard, occupying your space doesn't seem to be particularly popular these days...

It probably would which is why I think the siphon should "hack" into the tower and cheeze up the numbers so you think you are getting all the mats you should while you don't. The tower would have the wrong info but your API would do what it does right now which is give you what the tower assume you have in. The siphon obviously "hack" into the tower system to be able to pull stuff out of it so it would not be that much of a stretch to make it also play a bit with the inventory system. Of course as long as you don't state the siphon actually do that, there is no reason for the tower to not know it's inventory is not at the intended level.

Now if that is actaully possible to implement, I have no idea at all but with the current implementation, since they didn't think it was worth the effort or for whatever other reason, it seems it was never done. :CCP: I guess...

Oh I guess we should just pretend we didn't see the numbers our own API was telling us.

Exploits are how CCP defines them to be. Recently they mistakenly multiplied most of the material costs of mobile warp disruptors tenfold. A lot of people made money off of this temporary oversight. Was it declared an exploit? No.

After Rubicon 1.3 nerfed drone assist to 50 drones per assistee, players discovered that the limitation wasn't actually working and continued to use it as before. Was anyone banned for this? No.

You see it, you report it. IMMEDIATELY

CCP then fixes it in a timely manner.

In the mean time, sure, use the info. It'll be up to the users to hold off using them until the situation is resolved.

Pretty sure the word "Exploit" predates computers, never mind computer games or CCP for that matter. I'm also pretty sure that if I dig through the EULA, I'd find something that covers this. CCP shouldn't have to come out and say it directly for each and every occurrence when they already have a blanket statement on the subject. It's not CCP fault if some are ignorant to these rules and what they mean.

Ignorance is no excuse.

But don't go sitting there and say that between the time these units came to be and this bug reaching light, you or anyone else hasn't noticed it.

Now I don't agree with taking moon goo away from one party to give to another. More like, CCP should reimburse the smaller corps and individual players the siphons they lost to the big null sec alliances.

Setting examples with temp bans to key individuals (as opposed to entire alliances) would be smart of CCP as well. Otherwise they just come off as lap dogs to the big null sec alliances.

POS code, too stront!!

So someone is very mad at the reason their awesome.. lets plant siphons plan didn't work..

because some smart cookie decided to put 2 and 2 together about why their pos wasn't pulling in as much goo as expected

Is it an exploit, its an error in code that was "abused" and used by many.

Is it something that can be bannable? no. There is 0 retribution that can be done against anybody who used to api to track these modules as everything originates on CCP's side.

It is a knucklehead move to not notify CCP.

Should something be done about this? Yes but it should not be taken on by the players, but by CCP.

Update the module so the API doesn't show it anymore, and I would probably change it so that it doesn't show up on Dscan anymore either (does it I don't know never used any of them).

Its not something actionable against the player base. They knew, and either did or did not notify CCP. It is not something they can take out on players though.