These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Accuracy of in-game information
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#1 - 2011-12-20 17:38:05 UTC  |  Edited by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
Background:

Following the GM post allowing dec scraping which stated that wardec shenanigans were no longer considered exploits, my corp engaged in a number of stunts where we corp-hopped in space in order to split enemy forces and utterly abuse the aggression system. A number of us got warnings for it. When I cited the post that indicated it was legal, the GM responded by telling me:

Quote:
That is considered an exploit as that gives other players no chance to see if you are an enemy or not.

I completely agree that it was an exploit and we stopped using it immediately upon it being identified as a bug. (it was never intended to hide the fact that we'd suddenly changed corps. We didn't know that the overview and local list would fail to update) However, it raises an important issue: there are a number of instances where the game is presenting people with inaccurate information that is prompting them to make decisions they would not have otherwise made. Two examples from currently-active threads:

Transferring a PCO to another corp while it is being shot so that all involved parties suffer sec status loss and get GCC. The dev response here has been great and this looks to be getting a patch in short order, but it's a symptom of a larger problem.

A player lost a ship to faction navy because his security status on one window said -1.9, while on another it said -2.1. Information in Eve needs to be consistent and accurate. If he sees that he is -1.9, he should be safe. Period. There's no excuse for some mysterious delay in the status updating which causes him to lose a ship when the game TOLD him it was safe. It's no different than not knowing that a wartarget is on grid or in system with you.

The community needs to make a concerted effort to identify and report these bugs and the CSM needs to make it a priority to push for fixes to them. These are an unnecessary addition to the learning curve of Eve, where one often learns the hard way that it's necessary to perform undocumented steps to ensure the game mechanics are functioning properly.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
T' Elk
Strategically Bad
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2011-12-20 17:44:09 UTC
Tell monk T' Elk sais hai

~Badposter since FOOOOREEEEEVAAAAAR~ I come back after 2 years to THIS? ~Now 4 years apparently
Apollo Gabriel
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#3 - 2011-12-20 18:04:05 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Background:

Following the GM post allowing dec scraping which stated that wardec shenanigans were no longer considered exploits, my corp engaged in a number of stunts where we corp-hopped in space in order to split enemy forces and utterly abuse the aggression system. A number of us got warnings for it. When I cited the post that indicated it was legal, the GM responded by telling me:

Quote:
That is considered an exploit as that gives other players no chance to see if you are an enemy or not.

I completely agree that it was an exploit and we stopped using it immediately upon it being identified as a bug. (it was never intended to hide the fact that we'd suddenly changed corps. We didn't know that the overview and local list would fail to update) However, it raises an important issue: there are a number of instances where the game is presenting people with inaccurate information that is prompting them to make decisions they would not have otherwise made. Two examples from currently-active threads:

Transferring a PCO to another corp while it is being shot so that all involved parties suffer sec status loss and get GCC. The dev response here has been great and this looks to be getting a patch in short order, but it's a symptom of a larger problem.

A player lost a ship to faction navy because his security status on one window said -1.9, while on another it said -2.1. Information in Eve needs to be consistent and accurate. If he sees that he is -1.9, he should be safe. Period. There's no excuse for some mysterious delay in the status updating which causes him to lose a ship when the game TOLD him it was safe. It's no different than not knowing that a wartarget is on grid or in system with you.

The community needs to make a concerted effort to identify and report these bugs and the CSM needs to make it a priority to push for fixes to them. These are an unnecessary addition to the learning curve of Eve, where one often learns the hard way that it's necessary to perform undocumented steps to ensure the game mechanics are functioning properly.


Agreed, it is time for CCP to revisit the information presented in the game.

It is also time to totally overhaul war decs.
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.   Peace out Zulu! Hope you land well!
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#4 - 2011-12-20 18:05:41 UTC
War decs, faction warfare, and the bounty system all need a lot of love. But that's three more threads, several of which I've already posted in Cool

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
gfldex
#5 - 2011-12-20 18:07:42 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
The community needs to make a concerted effort to identify and report these bugs and the CSM needs to make it a priority to push for fixes to them. These are an unnecessary addition to the learning curve of Eve, where one often learns the hard way that it's necessary to perform undocumented steps to ensure the game mechanics are functioning properly.


We where doing that for years. The usual response: "Can not reproduce." showed quite clearly how much extra work is valued by CCPlings. The overview is a mess since it was introduced. Maybe having a stargate shown as a valid war target is just to funny to fix that bug.

The problem is not the reporting but the attitude toward those reports. Please contact you CSM delegate to get in touch with CCP Games affiliates.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#6 - 2011-12-20 18:11:23 UTC
data should be accurate across the board
+1
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#7 - 2011-12-20 18:36:27 UTC
gfldex wrote:
We where doing that for years. The usual response: "Can not reproduce." showed quite clearly how much extra work is valued by CCPlings. The overview is a mess since it was introduced. Maybe having a stargate shown as a valid war target is just to funny to fix that bug.

The problem is not the reporting but the attitude toward those reports. Please contact you CSM delegate to get in touch with CCP Games affiliates.

The post-Incarna refocus gives me hope that NOW is the time to tackle this sort of thing. They've turned their attention back to the community at least for the moment. Let's use that attention to get some stuff fixed.

Also, bittervet much? P

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.