These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Goons 4x4ing through the Sandbox - Market Manipulation on a Grand Scale

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2961 - 2012-06-24 07:44:36 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Your comparison is flawed. The "Jewbal" built the economic equivalent of a warp drive with the economic equivalent of tinker toys.

That's why everybody's so mad.

Economic warp fields shouldn't be possible with Viking-made formulae. Icelandic Calculus is champion.


No everybody are not so mad at all.

This is my post in this very thread: "BRAVO GOONS!".

But now that they proved their point and shown CCP they outplayed them, look at the thing for what it is (an abuse) and undo the damage done on the game. They got their "medal" and media e-fame, along with the privilege for not being banned that's all the prize they should keep.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2962 - 2012-06-24 07:49:29 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Your comparison is flawed. The "Jewbal" built the economic equivalent of a warp drive with the economic equivalent of tinker toys.

That's why everybody's so mad.

Economic warp fields shouldn't be possible with Viking-made formulae. Icelandic Calculus is champion.


No everybody are not so mad at all.

This is my post in this very thread: "BRAVO GOONS!".

But now that they proved their point and shown CCP they outplayed them, look at the thing for what it is (an abuse) and undo the damage done on the game. They got their "medal" and media e-fame, along with the privilege for not being banned that's all the prize they should keep.

I want you to tell me who, exactly, was abused here. Who didn't have the same opportunity to leverage advertised mechanics?

To be abuse it has to be an unfair advantage. The mechanic was advertised.

Was it the people who got the cheaper faction modules? Were they abused?

Was it Beta Testers who commented to CCP about the vulnerability of the system as-developed?

What was abused here? I can't see anything that wasn't "working as intended" if we're being totally honest about it.

The system was designed to do what it did. When applied, the system worked as predicted by its design parameters.

This was no exploit.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2963 - 2012-06-24 07:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
corestwo wrote:

Depends on the devs. I've heard exactly what you described (well, close) happened in EQ 2 or something, and SOE flipped out and banned. On the other hand, I've heard something like it happened in LOTR Online and the devs there went "yep, our fault" and simply fixed it and moved on.


CCP are indeed saying "yep, our fault" and are simply fixing it and moving on. I still see you posting so they did not ban hammer you or anything, just undoing the game damage.


corestwo wrote:


Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

You can build a skyscraper with perfect sub-components, perfect materials, in the best place and... bork the structural calculations so it crumbles after 2 weeks. Individual parts worked exactly as intended but now it's a pile of dirt.

I know what you're trying to say, mostly because you've said it again and again, but...your example sucks, because if you "bork the structural calculations" then individual parts were not, in fact, working as intended. P


Yes they were individually working as intended, it's just the architect who fat fingered his calculator and did not type a zero so that one of the perfect individual parts put in there were not sufficient to keep the building up.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#2964 - 2012-06-24 07:55:36 UTC  |  Edited by: corestwo
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
corestwo wrote:

Depends on the devs. I've heard exactly what you described (well, close) happened in EQ 2 or something, and SOE flipped out and banned. On the other hand, I've heard something like it happened in LOTR Online and the devs there went "yep, our fault" and simply fixed it and moved on.


CCP are indeed saying "yep, our fault" and are simply fixing it and moving on. I still see you posting so they did not ban hammer you or anything, just undoing the game damage.


Sorry, I left out the part where the devs of LOTR Online who went "yep, our fault" let the players who discovered the legitimate but unintended interaction keep the money they made from it. Important distinction, really.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Yes they were individually working as intended, it's just the architect who fat fingered his calculator and did not type a zero so that one of the perfect individual parts put in there were not sufficient to keep the building up.

If the one of the perfect individual parts wasn't sufficient to keep the building up, then by definition it isn't actually anywhere near perfect and is in fact quite flawed, much like your analogy.

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2965 - 2012-06-24 07:57:11 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Spitfire
Please keep it civil and on topic. Spitfire

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2966 - 2012-06-24 07:58:00 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Spitfire
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
corestwo wrote:

Depends on the devs. I've heard exactly what you described (well, close) happened in EQ 2 or something, and SOE flipped out and banned. On the other hand, I've heard something like it happened in LOTR Online and the devs there went "yep, our fault" and simply fixed it and moved on.


CCP are indeed saying "yep, our fault" and are simply fixing it and moving on. I still see you posting so they did not ban hammer you or anything, just undoing the game damage.


corestwo wrote:


Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

You can build a skyscraper with perfect sub-components, perfect materials, in the best place and... bork the structural calculations so it crumbles after 2 weeks. Individual parts worked exactly as intended but now it's a pile of dirt.

I know what you're trying to say, mostly because you've said it again and again, but...your example sucks, because if you "bork the structural calculations" then individual parts were not, in fact, working as intended. P


Yes they were individually working as intended, it's just the architect who fat fingered his calculator and did not type a zero so that one of the perfect individual parts put in there were not sufficient to keep the building up.

Vaerah, they worked correctly not just taken separately, but exactly within deisgn parameters when combined, as well.

I can't stress this enough: This only worked because the "*snip*" developed a model based explicitly on CCP's design parameters precisely as stated in various press releases.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Haikato Saraki
Doomheim
#2967 - 2012-06-24 08:00:23 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Spitfire
Aryth wrote:
CCP has now gone and nuked a ton of assets on our accounts. Meaning, we are losing wealth we had previous to this. Wow. But the message is clear. If you want to abuse something, you do not report it. As someone who tried to work with CCP, my advice to anyone in the future is. Don't.



this has been stated and restated several times in this threadanaught but all it really boils down to is; "we weren't as evil as we could have been."
...which as far as legal defences go is only slightly better than "the b!tch had it coming."


If it had been Jade instead of you who had found and abused this, would you seriously try to tell me you would be lobbying as hard for them to keep the assets gained from this exploit?
Honestly, seems to me that the only reason the involved "*snip*" haven't been banned is BECAUSE they brought it to CCP's attention. I sincerely hope that you DO try to keep it hush-hush the next time you find something like this because when CCP uncovers that future exploit your gona lose a lot more than you did today.


epic exploit was epic, but did you really expect to crash the LP markets with an exploit and get away with it?
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2968 - 2012-06-24 08:02:30 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:

so you're saying that market manipulation should be bannable


I would not, I actually applaud at their genius.

But the game companies usually don't like this kind of genius played on their products, so - regardless of me or you liking it or not, they go very heavy handed.

Point in case, in WAR in the last months there have been:

- Mass people banning because they discovered they could get an health buff thru a pet by going in certain zones. Developers used a flawed formula... rings you something similar?

- Mass people perma banning with no recourse allowed because they discovered they could increase their stats a lot by clicking on certain NPCs, which applied a formula that could be gamed.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2969 - 2012-06-24 08:03:47 UTC
Haikato Saraki wrote:
Aryth wrote:
CCP has now gone and nuked a ton of assets on our accounts. Meaning, we are losing wealth we had previous to this. Wow. But the message is clear. If you want to abuse something, you do not report it. As someone who tried to work with CCP, my advice to anyone in the future is. Don't.



this has been stated and restated several times in this threadanaught but all it really boils down to is; "we weren't as evil as we could have been."
...which as far as legal defences go is only slightly better than "the b!tch had it coming."


If it had been Jade instead of you who had found and abused this, would you seriously try to tell me you would be lobbying as hard for them to keep the assets gained from this exploit?
Honestly, seems to me that the only reason the involved "jewbal" haven't been banned is BECAUSE they brought it to CCP's attention. I sincerely hope that you DO try to keep it hush-hush the next time you find something like this because when CCP uncovers that future exploit your gona lose a lot more than you did today.


epic exploit was epic, but did you really expect to crash the LP markets with an exploit and get away with it?

Please demonstrate how this was an exploit when CCP hasn't even completed their explanation. That's a mighty big strawman you built there.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2970 - 2012-06-24 08:09:41 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:

I want you to tell me who, exactly, was abused here. Who didn't have the same opportunity to leverage advertised mechanics?

To be abuse it has to be an unfair advantage. The mechanic was advertised.


I copied the word that a CCP employee officially used in this thread. If you don't like he wrote abuse, then feel free to unsub.



Darth Gustav wrote:

The system was designed to do what it did. When applied, the system worked as predicted by its design parameters.

This was no exploit.


That's why said CCP employee said "abuse" and not "exploit". And this is the only reason why the involved players have not been banned.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Elysium Foxx
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2971 - 2012-06-24 08:12:28 UTC
so i have this text book i'm using for a University degree - in it it has a definition of an exploit.

blah blah.... or, an exploit can be a documented process to take advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, usually in software, that is either inherent in the software or is created by the attacker. .... blah blah.

page 10 chapter 1
Principles of Information Security
by, Michael E. Whitman & Herbert J. Mattord

Just thought i'd share that with the thread. Not sure if its relevant.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2972 - 2012-06-24 08:13:12 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:

I want you to tell me who, exactly, was abused here. Who didn't have the same opportunity to leverage advertised mechanics?

To be abuse it has to be an unfair advantage. The mechanic was advertised.


I copied the word that a CCP employee officially used in this thread. If you don't like he wrote abuse, then feel free to unsub.



Darth Gustav wrote:

The system was designed to do what it did. When applied, the system worked as predicted by its design parameters.

This was no exploit.


That's why said CCP employee said "abuse" and not "exploit". And this is the only reason why the involved players have not been banned.

I suppose in CCP's house they have the right to have a "We're never wrong." policy.

We'll see how that goes for them on this.

As usual, I'll be watching what they do, not what they say.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2973 - 2012-06-24 08:14:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
corestwo wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
corestwo wrote:

Depends on the devs. I've heard exactly what you described (well, close) happened in EQ 2 or something, and SOE flipped out and banned. On the other hand, I've heard something like it happened in LOTR Online and the devs there went "yep, our fault" and simply fixed it and moved on.


CCP are indeed saying "yep, our fault" and are simply fixing it and moving on. I still see you posting so they did not ban hammer you or anything, just undoing the game damage.


Sorry, I left out the part where the devs of LOTR Online who went "yep, our fault" let the players who discovered the legitimate but unintended interaction keep the money they made from it. Important distinction, really.


You also left out the part where EvE is completely reliant on its player driven economy and it's a competitive game instead of a toy park. In particular, you also affected FW, a competitive feature in a competitive PvP game.


corestwo wrote:

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Yes they were individually working as intended, it's just the architect who fat fingered his calculator and did not type a zero so that one of the perfect individual parts put in there were not sufficient to keep the building up.

If the one of the perfect individual parts wasn't sufficient to keep the building up, then by definition it isn't actually anywhere near perfect and is in fact quite flawed, much like your analogy.


If the one of the perfect LP formulas wasn't sufficient to keep the market up, then by definition it isn't actually anywhere near perfect and is in fact quite flawed, much like your rebuttal.



The formula, taken out by itself works, like any of the parts of a building. But then you make it interact with the other parts and it crumbles because it was not conceived to work beyond certain situations.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2974 - 2012-06-24 08:15:04 UTC
Elysium Foxx wrote:
so i have this text book i'm using for a University degree - in it it has a definition of an exploit.

blah blah.... or, an exploit can be a documented process to take advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, usually in software, that is either inherent in the software or is created by the attacker. .... blah blah.

page 10 chapter 1
Principles of Information Security
by, Michael E. Whitman & Herbert J. Mattord

Just thought i'd share that with the thread. Not sure if its relevant.

This was not taking advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, though. It was just maths and nothing broke.

Bad design is not vulnerability. It's just bad design.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
#2975 - 2012-06-24 08:15:07 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Spitfire
Inappropriate post removed. Spitfire
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#2976 - 2012-06-24 08:20:36 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:

I can't stress this enough: This only worked because the "Jewbal" developed a model based explicitly on CCP's design parameters precisely as stated in various press releases.


No, because the most basic design parameter for a moving average is to smooth fluctuations, while it has been subverted to amplify them.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2977 - 2012-06-24 08:22:53 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:

I can't stress this enough: This only worked because the "Jewbal" developed a model based explicitly on CCP's design parameters precisely as stated in various press releases.


No, because the most basic design parameter for a moving average is to smooth fluctuations, while it has been subverted to amplify them.

By poor design, not by exploitation. This did not require any exception cases to occur and anybody could have utilized it, though it's doubtful many had the resources and the mental faculty to pull this off.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Elysium Foxx
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2978 - 2012-06-24 08:23:07 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Elysium Foxx wrote:
so i have this text book i'm using for a University degree - in it it has a definition of an exploit.

blah blah.... or, an exploit can be a documented process to take advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, usually in software, that is either inherent in the software or is created by the attacker. .... blah blah.

page 10 chapter 1
Principles of Information Security
by, Michael E. Whitman & Herbert J. Mattord

Just thought i'd share that with the thread. Not sure if its relevant.

This was not taking advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, though. It was just maths and nothing broke.

Bad design is not vulnerability. It's just bad design.



So you think using maths to create "free" LP would not break the system (EVE economy) if it was left as it was?

In other words - you think if nothing had changed that this would not leave the system vulnerable.

The system was flawed, had a vulnerability to abuse - it was abused, therefore, it was exploited.

But keep buzzing, maybe if you say it enough times you will brainwash CCP into believing you.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#2979 - 2012-06-24 08:26:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Elysium Foxx wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Elysium Foxx wrote:
so i have this text book i'm using for a University degree - in it it has a definition of an exploit.

blah blah.... or, an exploit can be a documented process to take advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, usually in software, that is either inherent in the software or is created by the attacker. .... blah blah.

page 10 chapter 1
Principles of Information Security
by, Michael E. Whitman & Herbert J. Mattord

Just thought i'd share that with the thread. Not sure if its relevant.

This was not taking advantage of a vulnerability or exposure, though. It was just maths and nothing broke.

Bad design is not vulnerability. It's just bad design.



So you think using maths to create "free" LP would not break the system (EVE economy) if it was left as it was?

In other words - you think if nothing had changed that this would not leave the system vulnerable.

The system was flawed, had a vulnerability to abuse - it was abused, therefore, it was exploited.

But keep buzzing, maybe if you say it enough times you will brainwash CCP into believing you.

Those LP cost literally dozens of ISK per unit. That is far from free. Roll

When there is a cost incurred, how is a player to inherently know it's out of whack? Blink

What other store doesn't honor their price labels? Cool

How's this for buzz? Smile

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Dave stark
#2980 - 2012-06-24 08:27:01 UTC
not sure what's thicker in there, the tears or the envy.