These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

PCO griefing in FW. CCP confirmed intended mechanics

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
DeBingJos
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2011-12-19 11:24:10 UTC
This topic needs a bump.

Also: Sn!pa

Ungi maðurinn þekkir reglurnar, en gamli maðurinn þekkir undantekningarnar. The young man knows the rules, but the old man knows the exceptions.

IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
#42 - 2011-12-19 12:57:58 UTC
This is just another new system added to the game that shows how aged FW mechanics are. The game is constantly evolving but FW remains largely unchanged since its inception several years ago.




FW really deserves a big feature in an upcoming expansion, to be honest you could probably market the whole thing as new because it has received such little attention I doubt many new players are even aware it exists.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#43 - 2011-12-19 15:54:21 UTC
Rixiu wrote:
Sounds simple enough to fix, in order for it to be transferred it has to be at 100% health and most defiantly not in post-reinforced mode.


Or only allow ownership to change hands during downtime via the contract system (which would allow for payments, items in exchange, time limits, etc).
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2011-12-19 15:58:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:



1. Set up PCO and use as normal, ideally in hostile space to gain maximum attention


2. Set up an alt corp in the hostile miltia (you probably already have one or two spare anyway)


3. Wait for the eve mail saying the PCO has been reinforced


4. When the hostile fleet start shooting it at after RF ends you swap ownership to the hostile militia corp and watch them all (including logi because CCP still haven't fixed that bug) take a large standing hit, security status loss and GCC.

You can either do this early on in the fight and give them the option to disengage or try and do it last minute, the WT red star remains on the targeted item so they probably won't notice in time.


5. Rinse and repeat untill hostile players start running out of standings.


6. ????


7. Profit and laugh at CCP's complete ineptitude at game design and continued neglect for FW


I am finding hard to grasp the idea of profit from it.
By effectively removing any opposition, therefore no more fights, and they are probably scarce now.
There is actually no profit in it, except removing your fun from game. But suit yourself.

I mean people who would use this mechanics got no right to cry about FW changes, because they are the one responsible.

It reminds me some of the threads about null being dead...
Break your own toy and then cry laud because its broken.
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#45 - 2011-12-19 17:20:04 UTC
Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
#46 - 2011-12-19 17:23:18 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.



Thank you very much.


If the above poster can't work out how you can profit from this I don't think there is anything that I can say that will help him.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#47 - 2011-12-19 17:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
I'll start by saying that this isn't a bug, it sounds like everything is functioning ok.

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.

If this is valid gameplay, then why do I have a warning for changing corps in space? They're changing the status of a target on grid in a way that players don't know the result of their actions. The game is, in fact, telling them it's okay to shoot a target. A lot of us were told we'd be banned for doing this, and now you say it's "functioning ok"? Why, because it's a structure and not a player?

Pick one, CCP. Either it's valid to change corps in space in a way that people are not fully aware of the status of everything, or it's not.

edit: yay for logic prevailing. Also, i should have read the last page before replying. Still, my response to the initial dev response stands.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#48 - 2011-12-19 17:28:57 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.


So can we infer then that if someone keeps the PCO under fire for the duration of it being reinforced, that they can prevent it changing hands?

(note: I'm far from expert on the mechanics of reinforced mode)

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#49 - 2011-12-19 17:39:42 UTC
CCP: another way to implement the change would be to say the POCO can only change hands when it is at 100% shields or in reinforced. Doing it that way means you only need to add a test to see if a transfer is legal, rather than adding a aggression timer to the structure and a test for legal transfer. May be easier to do the code change.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#50 - 2011-12-19 17:44:24 UTC
POCO ownership should be broadcast to all people in the grid while also automatically dropping all current target locks on the POCO.
There should also be a hefty cooldown between POCO ownership changes, minimum 1 hour.

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#51 - 2011-12-19 17:47:58 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.


So can we infer then that if someone keeps the PCO under fire for the duration of it being reinforced, that they can prevent it changing hands?

(note: I'm far from expert on the mechanics of reinforced mode)


Not during shield reinforcement because you cannot target it to aggress it. However you could in theory keep attacking it with a tiny amount of damage before it reaches reinforcement just to prevent a transfer, but I wouldn't want to wait around AFK to see what the owner thinks about that.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Asthariye
Angry Mustellid
#52 - 2011-12-19 17:57:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Asthariye
Thank you for this, Nullarbor. That will help a lot.

Any comment on the additional problems this causes in militia regarding the faction standings loss bug alluded to several times above? The inability to switch ownership while it's actively under fire will go some way towards remedying the effect of that but ultimately the bug, and thus the problem, still exists - even if a militiamember chooses to take the GCC he still has the additional problem of having to take and petition the standings loss. Is anyone even aware of this (regularly petitioned and reported) bug, is there a fix coming?
Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
#53 - 2011-12-19 18:13:36 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.


So can we infer then that if someone keeps the PCO under fire for the duration of it being reinforced, that they can prevent it changing hands?

(note: I'm far from expert on the mechanics of reinforced mode)


Not during shield reinforcement because you cannot target it to aggress it.


How about area of effect weapons?

Also:

CCP Nullarbor wrote:
that will ultimately depend on QA checking it


LOL good one Lol
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#54 - 2011-12-19 18:15:30 UTC
Asthariye wrote:
Thank you for this, Nullarbor. That will help a lot.

Any comment on the additional problems this causes in militia regarding the faction standings loss bug alluded to several times above? The inability to switch ownership while it's actively under fire will go some way towards remedying the effect of that but ultimately the bug, and thus the problem, still exists - even if a militiamember chooses to take the GCC he still has the additional problem of having to take and petition the standings loss. Is anyone even aware of this (regularly petitioned and reported) bug, is there a fix coming?


Not as part of this fix but I keep hearing faction warfare being mentioned in the planning for 2012, which I am quite excited about having flown in the militia myself for a while before joining CCP. So hopefully the issues with standings and alt corps messing with FW business can be reviewed soon(tm).

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#55 - 2011-12-19 18:21:49 UTC
Soi Mala wrote:
How about area of effect weapons?


Customs offices are not affected by smart bombs or bubbles etc

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Graelyn
Aeternus Command Academy
#56 - 2011-12-19 18:46:04 UTC
Continued Dev presence on these forums is deeply appreciated. Cool

Cardinal Graelyn

Amarr Loyalist of the Year - YC113
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
#57 - 2011-12-19 19:42:49 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Not as part of this fix but I keep hearing faction warfare being mentioned in the planning for 2012, which I am quite excited about having flown in the militia myself for a while before joining CCP. So hopefully the issues with standings and alt corps messing with FW business can be reviewed soon(tm).


I am very glad to hear this.

Addressing the obvious alt corp, alt T3 boosters and alt spying will go a long way to improving FW

The other key area is meaningful occupancy, and PCOs go some way towards this. I would like to see a system where occupancy in some way dictate who can place PCOs in the FW regions or at least gives the occupiers of the system kill rights on PCO in their space.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#58 - 2011-12-19 20:17:15 UTC
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Addressing the obvious alt corp, alt T3 boosters and alt spying will go a long way to improving FW

Welcome to EVE, sir.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2011-12-19 20:30:18 UTC
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Pak Narhoo wrote:
^^ Talk about jumping to conclusions. Let me give you a hint:


CCP Nullarbor wrote:

However I will raise this with the team to see if this is valid gameplay or if this is considered an exploit and report back here.



Well I don't see how intended game mechanics can be an exploit.




Checking to see if something is an exploit does not mean that something is an exploit. It means he is CHECKING.
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2011-12-19 23:52:23 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ok so an update on this, we are going to deny transferring ownership while the customs office is being attacked using the normal 15 min cool down on aggression. The real problem here is that players can be tricked into taking a security status hit or entering into combat outside of a wardec without realizing it.

Transferring ownership after a POCO has been put into reinforce for example is still valid and while this does allow owners to force an aggressor who they are at war with to take a security hit they will still be able to decide before hand if they want to do this and not unknowingly engage an owner they are not at war with.

I have hassled people today so that we can get this onto TQ this week but that will ultimately depend on QA checking it so fingers crossed.



Thats good that a fix is in to stop this from being abused.

But being able to transfer ownership when its be reinforced and such is still cheap. In all fairness is should need to be repped up to be able to transfer.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **