These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Message Regarding "Hyperdunking"

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#21 - 2015-01-27 17:55:52 UTC
ShadowandLight wrote:
Will using bumping (and occasionally agressing them with a throwaway alt) to keep a player from logging out be addressed soon?

What about it needs to be addressed?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#22 - 2015-01-27 17:55:58 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So why is it not considered an exploit considering you are avoiding the entire consequence of having the criminal timer.
Because it is not avoiding the consequence in the slightest. In fact, you're doing the exact opposite: your applying it to its fullest — even prolonging it for far longer than is usually necessary. The entire trick relies on those consequences to work.

Quote:
The criminal timer is supposed to mean that you are prevented from operating while under it, which is why you can't warp with it running.
And that is exactly what happens. Not until CONCORD comes along and releases you from those restrictions can the next phase of the gank take place. This is also why the old ruling wouldn't apply regardless: because you are taking the full brunt of the intended punishment and rolling with it.
So what purpose does the criminal timer have once concord blows up the ship? If it's to let people shoot them, a suspect timer can do that. So either the criminal timer is completely useless or the consequences it's supposed to give are being evaded.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Red Teufel
Calamitous-Intent
#23 - 2015-01-27 17:57:10 UTC
CCP Falcon will there be a change in rules regarding this tactic? It smells of bad gameplay design that I think the majority of eve players would agree with me. Would be neat to generate a fatigue timer like the jump mechanics but for a prison sentence :P.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#24 - 2015-01-27 17:57:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Lucas Kell wrote:
So why is it not considered an exploit considering you are avoiding the entire consequence of having the criminal timer.
The consequences of having a GCC are that you explode at the hands of Concord when you board a ship or undock in one, which is exactly what happens when you use this tactic.

Quote:
The criminal timer is supposed to mean that you are prevented from operating while under it, which is why you can't warp with it running.
If the purpose of the GCC timer was to completely shut you down, then you wouldn't be able to board a ship while under a GCC timer.

Quote:
Using an orca to reship on grid avoids this and means that for each gank run you do you are gaining only a criminal timer of a few minutes as your existing timer is refreshed.
Your point is what exactly?

Quote:
What this also means is that almost any ship or structure in the game can now be solo ganked.
This has always been the case, using an Orca to reship during a POS bash is an old trick for example. If you don't want your ship or structure to be solo ganked then you take steps to protect it.

Quote:
Considering one of the driving factors for the removal of input broadcasting was preventing people from being able to solo gank large ships and structures with ease, this seems like the exact opposite.
Citation needed.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#25 - 2015-01-27 18:00:33 UTC
Red Teufel wrote:
CCP Falcon will there be a change in rules regarding this tactic? It smells of bad gameplay design that I think the majority of eve (pansies) would agree with me. Would be neat to generate a fatigue timer like the jump mechanics but for a prison sentence :P.

I corrected your spelling.

Also, this is pretty 'neat', go play that...(and take Lucas/Veers with you)...

F

Would you like to know more?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#26 - 2015-01-27 18:01:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Lucas Kell wrote:
So what purpose does the criminal timer have once concord blows up the ship?
Same as before: to ensure you still can't avoid CONCORD — that any reshipping just means another loss.

Red Teufel wrote:
CCP Falcon will there be a change in rules regarding this tactic?
Why should they change when it has been made abundantly clear that both the rules and the mecahnics are working as intended? Also, how is it “bad gameplay design” that the mechanics are robust enough to enforce a cost but still allow you to keep shooting as long as you're willing to pay that cost?

e: In fact, the thing you're smelling is probably your notion of a “prison” — presumably some mechanic to keep people from playing the game. That creates such immensely bad gameplay that it is currently a bannable offence to do it to players.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#27 - 2015-01-27 18:08:30 UTC
What a crock.
Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#28 - 2015-01-27 18:13:39 UTC
It stands to reason then, to have CONCORD preloaded on grid while mining as a legitimate tactic right? I mean the attacking ship does get killed, as expected, and concord remains on grid, as desired. I paid the price of having concord on my selected grid, and thus I'm not abusing game mechanics. Right?

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#29 - 2015-01-27 18:16:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Erufen Rito wrote:
It stands to reason then, to have CONCORD preloaded on grid while mining as a legitimate tactic right? I mean the attacking ship does get killed, as expected, and concord remains on grid, as desired. I paid the price of having concord on my selected grid, and thus I'm not abusing game mechanics. Right?
Correct, pre-spawning Concord is fine, they won't protect you, but they will kill your attackers. Fit a tank, and bear in mind that CCP frown heavily upon recycling any alts you use to spawn Concord.

GM Lelouch wrote:
We do not consider intentionally spawning CONCORD using disposable ships an exploit at this time
Source

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#30 - 2015-01-27 18:17:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Erufen Rito wrote:
It stands to reason then, to have CONCORD preloaded on grid while mining as a legitimate tactic right? I mean the attacking ship does get killed, as expected, and concord remains on grid, as desired. I paid the price of having concord on my selected grid, and thus I'm not abusing game mechanics. Right?

This has pretty much always been the case, as long as you don't go for the mythical recycled alt.

e: Crucial word missing. Lol
Pharill
An Eye For An Eye
Phoebe Freeport Republic
#31 - 2015-01-27 18:17:54 UTC
What a.. Perfectly wonderful piece of news. CCP has given everything lately to the whiners and complainers. Finally we have an instance where "Working as intended" is perfectly correct and will generate the vastly superior tears of the hichsec carebear.
Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#32 - 2015-01-27 18:19:24 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Erufen Rito wrote:
It stands to reason then, to have CONCORD preloaded on grid while mining as a legitimate tactic right? I mean the attacking ship does get killed, as expected, and concord remains on grid, as desired. I paid the price of having concord on my selected grid, and thus I'm not abusing game mechanics. Right?

This has pretty much always been the case, as long as you go for the mythical recycled alt.

It was actually deemed an exploit quite while ago. I'd be happy to show you the source, but I don't have the time for it right now. Im sure someone else knows where it is. But trust me, it was an exploit at some point.

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165
Counselor Gina
Silk Road Descendants
#33 - 2015-01-27 18:20:48 UTC
I'm fairly new - not a ganker or a freighter, so I really have no horse in this race - but I've always had a question.

It seems like the vast majority of contested methods of attack all come down to bumping not being considered an act of aggression. Why is it that way? Bumping can almost indefinitely prevent warp (right?), and as long as your locked (another act of non-aggression), you can't log off either? I get bumps happen non-aggressively from time to time - but freighters tell me (I contract them a ton) they get bumped for 10, 20, 30 minutes and more. If this is not an act of aggression, why is my scram or point?

Again, I'm pretty ambivalent to it either way, I'm just wondering the historical roots for this decision?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#34 - 2015-01-27 18:21:39 UTC
Erufen Rito wrote:
It was actually deemed an exploit quite while ago. I'd be happy to show you the source, but I don't have the time for it right now. Im sure someone else knows where it is. But trust me, it was an exploit at some point.

Yeah, no.

it has been claimed to be an exploit for ages, and no-one has ever been able to provide any kind of evidence or source to suggest anything of the kind that I've seen. The best that has appeared is a mention that you're not allowed to recycle alts, which they have wilfully misconstrued as a ban on CONCORD manipulation.
Concord Guy's Cousin
Doomheim
#35 - 2015-01-27 18:22:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Concord Guy's Cousin
Erufen Rito wrote:
It was actually deemed an exploit quite while ago. I'd be happy to show you the source, but I don't have the time for it right now. Im sure someone else knows where it is. But trust me, it was an exploit at some point.
It was ruled upon/clarified in July last year, the ruling is linked in my previous post.

ISD LackOfFaith ~ "Your Catalyst was a hamster, and your Retriever smelt of elderberries"

NPC Forum Alt, because reasons.
Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#36 - 2015-01-27 18:23:51 UTC
Erufen Rito wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Erufen Rito wrote:
It stands to reason then, to have CONCORD preloaded on grid while mining as a legitimate tactic right? I mean the attacking ship does get killed, as expected, and concord remains on grid, as desired. I paid the price of having concord on my selected grid, and thus I'm not abusing game mechanics. Right?

This has pretty much always been the case, as long as you go for the mythical recycled alt.

It was actually deemed an exploit quite while ago. I'd be happy to show you the source, but I don't have the time for it right now. Im sure someone else knows where it is. But trust me, it was an exploit at some point.

You're talking nonsense here buddy
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#37 - 2015-01-27 18:25:57 UTC
Counselor Gina wrote:
It seems like the vast majority of contested methods of attack all come down to bumping not being considered an act of aggression. Why is it that way? Bumping can almost indefinitely prevent warp (right?), and as long as your locked (another act of non-aggression), you can't log off either?
Quite simple: because it doesn't prevent a ship from warping. In fact, it does not impart any negative effects of any kind; it doesn't change any stats; it uses no aggressive modules or any other items that would trigger anything.

Beyond that, policing collisions would make it trivial to gank for free since intent is not something you can really judge and decide in code, so it would have a decidedly negative effect on the game if something like that were implemented.
Dodo Veetee
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#38 - 2015-01-27 18:29:16 UTC
"Players are also reminded that if someone is criminally flagged, they are fair game to be attacked in self-defense. Feel free to use this to your advantage."

Let me just fit weapons on my freighter from now on so I can fight back

OH WAIT

Back to using escorts, bois.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#39 - 2015-01-27 18:34:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So why is it not considered an exploit considering you are avoiding the entire consequence of having the criminal timer.
Because they are not avoiding them.
Of course you are. They may as well have the criminal timer expire once concord blows up their ship and replace it with a suspect timer if they are still allowed to freely operate as if it didn't exist. The criminal timer prevents you warping a ship while it ticks down. Using an alt to warp that ship for you in an orca then hopping into it while in space seems to be against what the criminal timer is for, so why does it even exist?
No you're not avoiding them.

The criminal timer means you are to be shot on sight, in any ship in high sec. It does not stop you boarding them. If it were meant to do that, it would.
Just because you are trying to equate your ideals on top of the criminal timer, doesn't change the fact they are not avoid the consequences of it.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#40 - 2015-01-27 18:35:14 UTC
If we want the policy changed, all we have to do is hyperdunk Chribba in his Veldnaught...

CCP would reverse position on this faster than Concord could respond. Roll

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.