EVE General Discussion

I would suggest you read the EULA again.

An automatic "no claim" setting that makes all wrecks you pop un-owned the moment it's spawned (at the death of the target of course) would be a great feature.

I sense Punkturis will post in here so we see a DEV link but there will be no definitive answer and we will all be therefore teased once again and some of you will enjoy it.

the very few times I ran the mom site before giving up on incursions we always abandoned as we went along so the lag hit would be minimal.

It seriously needs further investigation. As you can see a poster in this thread has stated intentions to use it in a manner obviously against the EULA.

As for finding the events. Look at your internal logs for most used incursion systems look for the DCs and compare them with abandon events.

Yes many of them are accidents but you will notice quickly the ones meant for harm. Midsite bluing at convenient times for a logi DC or heavy damage without ability to broadcast. Look at your petitions for extra data and you will see how serious this is very quickly.

Be aware that hatred for incursion content by runners of other content and playstyles is rather extreme right now. Use of this and other exploits to cause chaos is going to happen by them.

the cheetah still lurks

Incidentally, Gridlock's recent round of optimizations reworked the client's response to wrecks being abandoned. It's still not *lightning fast* but it should be way better than before.

Is it?

A couple of points if I may.

The actions of the abbandoning player is a choice right. A binary one.

Either Abbandon your ship to change to another

or Warp to a station to do it.

Note if you do the first in full knowledge and awarness that it will create lag, the you have indeed made a decision to delibaratly create lag..

You point would seem to be .. it can't be proven this was done with malicious intent, my asserstion is it doesn't matter as you have chosen to delibaratly create lag which may have a detremental effect , that is against the EULA wether your true intention was malicious or merely lazy, is of no consequence.

Further to this as this tactic could be used maliciosly it should be an offence forwith. In a situation where poeple could lose very expensive ships for the sake of someone saving a couple of seconds warp time the consequences must be weighed up ,and as the 'defendant' has the most to lose in this case and the offenders actions are otherwise fairly insignificant gameplay wise, I think it would be advisable to find in favour of the defence in this case.

There were optimizations done that should have reduced the performance hit in the last big patch. Is this as bad?

I havent been able to play the last couple of days. I will be able to test later today and will post my findings along with the logserver report via bug report.

From what Ive heard though the optimization have made it better.

Now....what about adding the abandoning to the fleet log?

Let's see - abandoning wrecks suspected in the loss of shiny ships and CCP "innocently" asks if someone has tested the problem for them to see if they still lose shiny ships. Never say CCP doesn't have a sick sense of humor....