These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Logoffski exploit, video proof.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#41 - 2012-03-24 15:02:15 UTC
Othran wrote:
You can complain all you like but the mechanic won't get changed.




Exactly. As others pointed out, more DPS would have fixed this "problem". HTFU.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2012-03-24 15:03:41 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:
Self entitled failure beliving everything is his, fails to plan, and whines about it. News at 11!

Lets see what did I not miss

1. Gay ****** music
2. Oracle having six lows, had exactly 1 mod the DCU. So, where is the damage mods? The pilot of the oracle in the video deserves to be shot for not putting his all into it and flying risk adverse (afraid of losing 5 mill in T2 mods or like 500k in meta 1)
3. Did everyone have their guns over loaded? I saw the Oracle pilot did, but WTF would you group it three times. More time to activate each one instead of just one group and fire - BTW, pre-activate and they fire almost right after lock.
4. Faction ammo? Can't tell, but 15%...******* idiots if you didn't use it and it makes a hell of a difference.
5. Damage implants? Yeah, you don't deserve a damn thing because you assume "Hey, 15 minutes...we got all the time in the ******* world!" and look what happened...just apply maximum damage in the shortest amount of time to burn that ***** into a wreck. You flying without even a 3% laser mod on that oracle...it could of made the difference but if you fly empty because you are risk adverse that is your damn problem it disseappered.
6. Gay ****** music.

Don't ever assume you are entitled because somehow CCP said it was...aggression was forced explicity for Titans since all smaller ships burn because they have thick ass tanks nobody could kill in 15 minutes and if the Titan pilot fired even once...it wasn't going anywhere...everyone else in smaller ships got applied as well. Freighter pilots cannot fire back, so they cannot get mutual fire aggression and that is why you lost assuming you would win. Even I learned that from someone bitching about it like a week after the change.
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#43 - 2012-03-24 15:03:58 UTC
If only the victim had a even remote chance to see the other side of the gate he wouldn't have to use this game mechanic as it currently functions. Posting in another "The game mechanics always screw me over, change them" thread.

This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2012-03-24 15:17:17 UTC
Aqriue wrote:

2. Oracle having six lows, had exactly 1 mod the DCU. So, where is the damage mods?


He has it set to hide passive modules.
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2012-03-24 15:25:35 UTC  |  Edited by: RougeOperator
MadMuppet wrote:
If only the victim had a even remote chance to see the other side of the gate he wouldn't have to use this game mechanic as it currently functions. Posting in another "The game mechanics always screw me over, change them" thread.



he did he had a scout.

We spent an hour avoiding only to have this Bull crap exploit used.

using the cloak mechanics to log off by DCing yourself before you declock is bull. Its an i win no risk button. It craps in the mouth of eves risk reward system.

All those saying get more DPS are just trolls. He should have been stuck for 15 min end of story. No risk game-play mechanics in low sec. You guys must be joking. This completely runs counter to how this game works on so many levels.

Odds are you all just have freight alts that you do this lame crap with and have sand in the ginas about someone exposing the exploit.


So what is it CCP devs, is this working as intended that you can jump a gate DC before disco and just get away even thought the other parties spent a lot of time and effort to get the kill.

Are you saying your advocate DCing on purpose as a valid game tactic? Or is this just some stuff you will give us more hypocritical baloney.

Is using the log off cloak mechanics on gate an exploit or not. CCP has to answer this.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
BeanBagKing
The Order of Atlas
#46 - 2012-03-24 15:30:28 UTC
People have already basically answered this, but to throw another reference at the OP.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=165121#post165121

CCP Tallest wrote:
Jack Dant wrote:
Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute?

If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.
BeanBagKing
The Order of Atlas
#47 - 2012-03-24 15:30:48 UTC
double post
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2012-03-24 15:32:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Mfume Apocal
At any rate, this is just an extension of the mechanic by which already logged off players cannot be aggressed by any (to my knowledge) legitimate means. This isn't the same as extending aggression gained while still logged in. Given that allowing logged-off players to gain aggression would lead to some utterly hilarious exploits on it's own, I'm betting CCP will let this particular side-effect slide.
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2012-03-24 15:34:46 UTC
BeanBagKing wrote:
People have already basically answered this, but to throw another reference at the OP.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=165121#post165121

CCP Tallest wrote:
Jack Dant wrote:
Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute?

If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.




No they need to specifically answer to jumping a gate and logging off while before decloak.

There is a difference between logging off getting dced while in warp while everyone can still see you and abusing a game mechanic in a way it was not intended to be used.

This is what CCP needs to answer.

Is using this mechanic in the way it was used in the video CCP sponsored. Is logging off a to avoid a fight something CCP supports.

Thats what they need to answer.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2012-03-24 15:36:19 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:
BeanBagKing wrote:
People have already basically answered this, but to throw another reference at the OP.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=165121#post165121

CCP Tallest wrote:
Jack Dant wrote:
Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute?

If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.




No they need to specifically answer to jumping a gate and logging off while before decloak.

There is a difference between logging off getting dced while in warp while everyone can still see you and abusing a game mechanic in a way it was not intended to be used.

This is what CCP needs to answer.

Is using this mechanic in the way it was used in the video CCP sponsored. Is logging off a to avoid a fight something CCP supports.

Thats what they need to answer.




Logged off players cannot (legitimately) gain aggression under any circumstances. This is working as intended.
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-03-24 15:36:25 UTC
Mfume Apocal wrote:
At any rate, this is just an extension of the mechanic by which already logged off players cannot be aggressed by any (to my knowledge) legitimate means. This isn't the same as extending aggression gained while still logged in. Given that allowed logged-off players to gain aggression would lead to some utterly hilarious exploits on it's own, I'm betting CCP will let this particular side-effect slide.



No F that. Kill the 1 min despawn. Its 15 min or nothing.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#52 - 2012-03-24 15:37:29 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:
Mfume Apocal wrote:
At any rate, this is just an extension of the mechanic by which already logged off players cannot be aggressed by any (to my knowledge) legitimate means. This isn't the same as extending aggression gained while still logged in. Given that allowed logged-off players to gain aggression would lead to some utterly hilarious exploits on it's own, I'm betting CCP will let this particular side-effect slide.



No F that. Kill the 1 min despawn. Its 15 min or nothing.




You do not want this. I assure you.
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#53 - 2012-03-24 15:38:24 UTC
Mfume Apocal wrote:
RougeOperator wrote:
BeanBagKing wrote:
People have already basically answered this, but to throw another reference at the OP.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=165121#post165121

CCP Tallest wrote:
Jack Dant wrote:
Sounds good, but will this also affect people who log off without aggression, and would normally dissapear within 1 minute?

If you have not registered aggression at the point of logoff, you will disappear as normal. This cannot be extended by post-logoff aggression.




No they need to specifically answer to jumping a gate and logging off while before decloak.

There is a difference between logging off getting dced while in warp while everyone can still see you and abusing a game mechanic in a way it was not intended to be used.

This is what CCP needs to answer.

Is using this mechanic in the way it was used in the video CCP sponsored. Is logging off a to avoid a fight something CCP supports.

Thats what they need to answer.




Logged off players cannot (legitimately) gain aggression under any circumstances. This is working as intended.


No CCP needs to state if the specific instance on the gate and Logging out before you decloaked is AS INTENDED.

If Yes I unsub my accounts. Cause thats utter crap.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#54 - 2012-03-24 15:38:58 UTC
Mfume Apocal wrote:
RougeOperator wrote:
Mfume Apocal wrote:
At any rate, this is just an extension of the mechanic by which already logged off players cannot be aggressed by any (to my knowledge) legitimate means. This isn't the same as extending aggression gained while still logged in. Given that allowed logged-off players to gain aggression would lead to some utterly hilarious exploits on it's own, I'm betting CCP will let this particular side-effect slide.



No F that. Kill the 1 min despawn. Its 15 min or nothing.




You do not want this. I assure you.


No I really do.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
dethleffs
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#55 - 2012-03-24 15:39:18 UTC
sheeesssshh...

This has been debated for centuries... What do you want ccp to do eh?

The logs won't show anything useful if a player exits game - and if it would, people would just jank out the network cable and d/cin that way.

Get over it and get more firepower instead of whining on the forums you poof
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2012-03-24 15:40:16 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:


No F that. Kill the 1 min despawn. Its 15 min or nothing.



No, this is a bit too far, even if the gatecloak/logoff is stupid
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#57 - 2012-03-24 15:41:53 UTC
dethleffs wrote:
sheeesssshh...

This has been debated for centuries... What do you want ccp to do eh?

The logs won't show anything useful if a player exits game - and if it would, people would just jank out the network cable and d/cin that way.

Get over it and get more firepower instead of whining on the forums you poof



Wow I thought you were kidding at first but your serious?

yank yoru cable to get away. You should die if someone catches you.


I thought eh 15 min thing was how it worked.

I dont care if they make that the way it works fore everything cause that's what i and everyone that was with me thought it worked to begin with. Nothing would change for us.

Only the losers that use such cheap grab ass exploits.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2012-03-24 15:42:47 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
RougeOperator wrote:


No F that. Kill the 1 min despawn. Its 15 min or nothing.



No, this is a bit too far, even if the gatecloak/logoff is stupid



How me an most i play with thought it worked to begin with.

Nothing changes for us.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
dischordia
wiggle Tech.
#59 - 2012-03-24 15:44:06 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:

If Yes I unsub my accounts. Cause thats utter crap.


Dont let the door hit you on the behind on the way out. if you have aggression you stay there, if you crash or log with out it your out in 1 min. its not fair on the the people who crash if they crash and loose what every they were flying if they didn't have aggression. Yes I know its not "real world" but you have to remember this is a computer game.

Just my two pence, the mechanic is fine as it is.

now time for the CCP Keynote

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem. - CCP Grayscale  - CCP troll BEST troll <3
Citrute
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#60 - 2012-03-24 15:56:36 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:

If Yes I unsub my accounts.


Your stuff, may i have it please?