These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Regarding AFK Complex Farming

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Samroski
Middle-Earth
#261 - 2012-08-09 18:44:40 UTC
They did it last summer and they're trying their best to screwup customer relations again.

Instead of the logical solution (to make minor changes in the complexes so that AFKing is not possible), the brilliant minds at CCP have come up with this incomprehensible idea!

Pay attention CCP:

THE SOLUTION IS TO IMPROVE THE GAME/COMPLEXES SO THAT AFKing IS PROBLEMATIC.

Any colour you like.
Maru Shana
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#262 - 2012-08-09 18:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Maru Shana
This thread reminds me of the Halo 2 forums on GameFAQs a long time ago. Or pretty much any forum where people could or would exploit an obvious glitch or oversight to their benefit. Then champion it as "by design" to justify their actions. Followed by accusing the devs of a witch hunt if they dared to do something to fix it.

"ZOMG You're fixing the BXR button glitch? But how will we play competitive Halo now? That was the best part of Halo 2! You can't just take that out of Halo 3! You're ruining everything by fixing an obvious flaw in the design!"


Humanity continues to disappoint me through its incessant justifications of entitlement and self-serving victim complexes. =_=


Edit: And for the schmucks saying that CCP should just "fix the complexes", why don't you give an example? Not everything can be "fixed" to prevent certain behavior. Sometimes the method of exploitation is integral to the game, such as Sentry drone usage. You would indeed whine if they barred sentry drones or any other style of play from the complexes, wouldn't you?

There are in a lose-lose position. Unless you have an amazing idea that can somehow constitute a win for all. You don't have something like that, do you?
Suqq Madiq
#263 - 2012-08-09 18:47:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Suqq Madiq
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:

Since it's WAY easier for me to quote CCP to tell you where you're wrong, here you go:

CCP Sreegs wrote:
The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within.


CCP Sreegs wrote:
Nothing has changed about our philosophy as regards what we are or aren't looking for behavior-wise.


If you look like a bot and you act like a bot, chances are you'll be identified as a bot. It's really not that difficult a concept to wrap one's head around.

Wrong. CCP admits that it is not a bot there. They admit they misidentified a non-botter as a botter: they then refuse to correct that mistake. It is the last part that is at issue here. Nobody, besides you and the algorithm, believes this player was an actual botter.


Nope. Wrong again. But you're used to that now. Nobody believes this player was a botter, myself included. However, as Sreegs clearly put it, the actions of this player and others like him "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within." It's not hard to understand.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#264 - 2012-08-09 18:48:57 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
[quote=War Kitten]
And there was no GM intervention because GMs do not respond to petitions regarding botting bans: those are directly shunted to Security.


Ahh, I see this point then.

Do you feel that removing the ban and the strike against these detected players is unfair then? Were their pleas ignored? It doesn't seem so.

GMs may or may not have been involved up to this point, its hard to say. But I feel relatively safe in assuming that CCP Sreegs didn't just unilaterally decide what happened here. It's not a big secret, obviously, and someone else in CCP has to be aware of the ruling on this "form of play".

At some point there has to be a decision made as to what is allowable gameplay and what isn't. Arguing that the mechanics allowed for it, so it should be ok is the oldest and weakest argument there is. It wasn't intended, and it's been declared wrong and bad by the people that make the rules. The end.


I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#265 - 2012-08-09 18:50:15 UTC
Maru Shana wrote:
...
Edit: And for the schmucks saying that CCP should just "fix the complexes", why don't you give an example? Not everything can be "fixed" to prevent certain behavior. Sometimes the method of exploitation is integral to the game, such as Sentry drone usage. You would indeed whine if they barred sentry drones or any other style of play from the complexes, wouldn't you?

There are in a lose-lose position. Unless you have an amazing idea that can somehow constitute a win for all. You don't have something like that, do you?


An idea I had was have the site simply detect if the player had made x amount of kills in the site in a time, and if they have, don't spawn any further. A hard cap on the spawning.

Of course, workarounds include flying neutral alts in and getting them to spawn the site, but the site could be gated off, with a failure to jump of "You are unable to get a lock on the target destination due to spacial interference. Suggest you try again in x hours".
Kristen Andelare
Night's Shadows
#266 - 2012-08-09 18:50:24 UTC
Kyle Frost wrote:
Pak Narhoo wrote:
Reading skill are not at 5 for a lot of posters here.

/me sad....


QFT


TLDR:

Everybody who is blaming CCP or whining about “the sandbox” – get a f*****g clue!

Solution to the problem – revise COSMOS missions and complexes. They haven’t been touched since they were implemented, and that was how long ago – 6-7 years? Increase the rewards from COSMOS missions – most of the storyline modules you receive are worthless and way too expensive to build. At the same time, increase the difficulty of the COSMOS missions – make the NPCs tougher, maybe give them Sleeper-like AI. Turn COSMOS missions into a real end-game PvE content.

Long, idiot friendly version:

I can’t believe I am going to agree with a goon and defend CCP, but I am still not at the point where I will call the white color black, just because I don’t like it. So here it goes…

Almost all legitimate (which do not include a third party automation software and will NOT get you banned) AFK activities in EVE are limited by game mechanics or by the EVE players themselves. For example - every afk miner has to empty his cargohold manually after a period of time (40 minutes or so), every afk mission runner has to manually move his ship to the next pocket after clearing the one he is currently in, afk ratting in 0.0 gets you killed and so on. The people that CCP’s message was addressed to, are not limited by game mechanics and they were exploiting this. So even though this was not made very clear in the original message, everyone with simple powers of deduction should have been able to reach this logical conclusion. For the special boys – AFK MINING/MISSIONING IS NOT THE SAME AS AFK FARMING A COSMOS COMPLEX. Idea

I can think of at least 3 or 4 complexes in the Caldari and Amarr COSMOS constellations which can be farmed by utilizing the sentry drones tactic. I guess there are some complexes in the Gallente and Minmatar constellations as well. The reason why there are BS-sized rats with high bounties spawning in those places, is because they are part of lvl 3-4 COSMOS missions and should pose an appropriate challenge. The reason why the rats respawn inside the complex constantly, is so that player B can come in, run the plex, and get his mission item after player A has done so before him. Keep in mind, that some of those complexes are not there solely for the purpose of certain missions, but they also provide you with tools and materials for producing the storyline items. For the special boys – THE COMPLEXES ARE SERVING THEIR PURPOSE JUST FINE. (HINT – THEIR PURPOSE IS NOT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH FREE ISK 23/7) Shocked

And now for all those wiseguys (like Jame Jarl Retief), saying this is CCP’s fault, they broke it, they should fix it, leave the AFK-ers alone, etc. THE COSMOS COMPLEXES ARE NOT BROKEN! They might be obsolete and in need of an update, but they are not broken. They served their purpose for a very long time. So before you start bitching, and whining, and pointing fingers again, please consider the following:

1. When COSMOS missions/complexes were first implemented 7 years ago, there were no passive tanked drone boats! The Gila and the Rattlesnake didn’t have drone and shield resist bonuses. The Ishtar was around, but back then there were no sentry drones. So NO, jackass – I guess it didn’t occur to them that something like this could happen. Evil

2. EVE is the largest, most diverse, player populated game universe. Creating and updating content for this universe is not exactly easy. If the devs could anticipate all the possible scenarios and how players would react in every given situation, they probably wouldn’t be bothering with EVE anymore – they would be playing the stock market and winning millions… hey, Iceland probably wouldn’t have gone bankrupt.

Could this issue have been looked at and fixed earlier – yeah, probably. But CCP seems to be on the right track now, so how about we cut them some slack?

And whoever suggested the “fix” with turning off drone automatic switching of targets – that’s a brilliant idea! As if drones are not stupid and irresponsive enough as it is, let’s make them even dumber… genius! Evil

P.S. When I first visited the EVE forums 6 years ago, I was impressed with how mature and sensible people were. Today, it’s like I am looking at a WoW forum, only with less leet-speak (for which I guess I should be grateful). Whining and stupidity all around… the EVE world is going to hell, just like the real one. Any suggestions on how to fix that? Roll



This!

I know the exact complexes that CCP Sreegs is talking about. COMSMOS missions. I've run them, and spent half an hour to an hour in them, constantly shuttling back and forth to the various cans where the loot spawns, so that I can find the ONE piece of loot I need to move forward. Once, I never found it and gave up, and gave up on the mission. But I saw the potential to just sit in there and shoot things.

A suggestion, remove the bounties from the rats in those COSMOS missions, and instead give an appropriately larger bonus for completing the mission they are intended for, and a large time bonus as well. Problem solved, forever.

Constant reference to AFK mining is really, really dumb. You have to empty your cargohold, without a bot program, you are NOT doing that while AFK. That includes ice mining. the new Mack you can mine in for about 40 minutes while AFK, come back, and OMG, Interact with the GAME!!!. This exploit required no interaction from dropping the drones and turning on the remote reppers to the point where you collect the drones and log off. No bounties would equal no one wanting to try this exploit.

As sreegs said, being AFK for a reasonable period of time (if that's to put in a load of laundry, grab some food, hit the can, kiss the wife goodbye, is perfectly fine. Being AFK for up to 23 hours, no interaction, Not OK.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#267 - 2012-08-09 18:51:16 UTC
Suqq Madiq wrote:

Nope. Wrong again. But you're used to that now. Nobody believes this player was a botter, myself included. However, as Sreegs clearly put it, the actions of this player and others like him "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within." It's not hard to understand.

I am gratified you've now come to understand the basic fact this player was not botting.

Now that we've nailed down the facts of the case, we are discussing the interpretation and actions placed on those facts - the thin pretext by which these actions are being justified as being caught by the botting system and handled by Team Security as bots instead of properly handled by the GM team. In this case since I am arguing Sreegs was wrong, it is pointless to simply repeat his statements I disagree with.
Feris
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#268 - 2012-08-09 18:51:35 UTC
Pakokkie wrote:
Poor game design attracts poor use. CCP should be permabanned for this.Idea


CCP did it again. Oh come on ccp. Use your keyboard and jump out of your hammock. How hard can it be to reprogram something that lame.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#269 - 2012-08-09 18:53:21 UTC
War Kitten wrote:

Do you feel that removing the ban and the strike against these detected players is unfair then? Were their pleas ignored? It doesn't seem so.

It's very correct to remove the botting sanctions against these players. That should have been done immediately, the botting detection fixed, and the issue of if this was proper player behavior punted to the GM team to determine and deal with. Team Security shouldn't be determining legitimate and non-legitimate gameplay when it doesn't involve things directly in their area of expertise: RMT, bots, hacks, and macros.

If the GMs decided this was inappropriate they have all the tools they need to handle it.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#270 - 2012-08-09 18:53:26 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:

Since it's WAY easier for me to quote CCP to tell you where you're wrong, here you go:

CCP Sreegs wrote:
The activity itself falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within.


CCP Sreegs wrote:
Nothing has changed about our philosophy as regards what we are or aren't looking for behavior-wise.


If you look like a bot and you act like a bot, chances are you'll be identified as a bot. It's really not that difficult a concept to wrap one's head around.

Wrong. CCP admits that it is not a bot there. They admit they misidentified a non-botter as a botter: they then refuse to correct that mistake. It is the last part that is at issue here. Nobody, besides you and the algorithm, believes this player was an actual botter.


They did correct the mistake. They've erased the ban on these people.

The mistake wasn't identifying them - it was banning them before letting everyone know this is also a bad thing to do. They've now unbanned them, and let everyone know this is a bad thing to do.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Suqq Madiq
#271 - 2012-08-09 19:05:14 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:

Nope. Wrong again. But you're used to that now. Nobody believes this player was a botter, myself included. However, as Sreegs clearly put it, the actions of this player and others like him "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within." It's not hard to understand.

I am gratified you've now come to understand the basic fact this player was not botting.

Now that we've nailed down the facts of the case, we are discussing the interpretation and actions placed on those facts - the thin pretext by which these actions are being justified as being caught by the botting system and handled by Team Security as bots instead of properly handled by the GM team. In this case since I am arguing Sreegs was wrong, it is pointless to simply repeat his statements I disagree with.


You seem very upset by the fact that the security team is handling these NearBots (in response to your own made-up word NotBots), which are close enough to botting to raise enough red flags to cause a well-deserved reaction from CCP. You can argue semantics all day long, but CCP GMs/Devs/whoever (it's irrelevant who handles it) determined that this activity "falls within the same philosophical context we place botting within". Clearly you don't agree with this philosophy, which makes me question why you believe that farming massive loads of ISK while 100% AFK is ok when it clearly is not and the people who engage in such actions should, after being appropriately warned (they have been now), should be banned.
Avel Rinah
Doomheim
#272 - 2012-08-09 19:06:02 UTC
I think you're all missing the point--LAZYTOWN LIVES
Cifese
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#273 - 2012-08-09 19:06:28 UTC
SmashTech wrote:
Hey Sreegs, answer me this

How much money is "too much money"?

Give me a concrete answer, not just "a lot." Bullshit rules are vague. Good ones are not.



Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:

SmashTech wrote:
Hey Sreegs, answer me this

How much money is "too much money"?

Give me a concrete answer, not just "a lot." I want to make sure I limit my botting to be under than mark
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#274 - 2012-08-09 19:06:41 UTC
Suqq Madiq wrote:

but CCP GMs/Devs/whoever (it's irrelevant who handles it) .

It is not; and it is your failure to understand this that causes our disagreement. I have, unfortunately, already explained this part at length so I won't bore people by repeating it.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#275 - 2012-08-09 19:08:04 UTC
Cifese wrote:

Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:

Actually, the previous rule was abundantly clear and easily applied: "any use of a bot or macro makes it botting". Now, if legitimate gameplay is botting if it exceeds certain isk thresholds, suddenly we don't have an abundantly clear and easily applied rule.
Suqq Madiq
#276 - 2012-08-09 19:08:31 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:

but CCP GMs/Devs/whoever (it's irrelevant who handles it) .

It is not; and it is your failure to understand this that causes our disagreement. I have, unfortunately, already explained this part at length so I won't bore people by repeating it.


Good. Because your explanation holds no weight and it would do nothing but belabor the process of you moving on.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#277 - 2012-08-09 19:09:12 UTC
War Kitten wrote:

They did correct the mistake. They've erased the ban on these people.

The mistake wasn't identifying them - it was banning them before letting everyone know this is also a bad thing to do. They've now unbanned them, and let everyone know this is a bad thing to do.


The individual mistaken punishment was corrected: the algorithm has not been and the incorrect handling of the issue has not been. That means this will continue to be an issue in the future.
Rakamy
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#278 - 2012-08-09 19:09:47 UTC
Kristen Andelare wrote:


This!

I know the exact complexes that CCP Sreegs is talking about. COMSMOS missions. I've run them, and spent half an hour to an hour in them, constantly shuttling back and forth to the various cans where the loot spawns, so that I can find the ONE piece of loot I need to move forward. Once, I never found it and gave up, and gave up on the mission. But I saw the potential to just sit in there and shoot things.

A suggestion, remove the bounties from the rats in those COSMOS missions, and instead give an appropriately larger bonus for completing the mission they are intended for, and a large time bonus as well. Problem solved, forever.

Constant reference to AFK mining is really, really dumb. You have to empty your cargohold, without a bot program, you are NOT doing that while AFK. That includes ice mining. the new Mack you can mine in for about 40 minutes while AFK, come back, and OMG, Interact with the GAME!!!. This exploit required no interaction from dropping the drones and turning on the remote reppers to the point where you collect the drones and log off. No bounties would equal no one wanting to try this exploit.

As sreegs said, being AFK for a reasonable period of time (if that's to put in a load of laundry, grab some food, hit the can, kiss the wife goodbye, is perfectly fine. Being AFK for up to 23 hours, no interaction, Not OK.



Exactly and I fail to see how so many people fail to understand what CCP are talking about.....they are not after the ppl that are afk for 20min what ccp are doing are going after the AFK plexers who are AFK for 20hrs. who rake in isk and absolutely do nothing for it in terms of game interaction.

It has nothing to do with AFK mining or AFK missioning (unless your going to sit there and peck at rats for 20hrsLol) and the majority of eve understand this and are not paranoid or doing just what CCP are trying to cut down on like 90% of the people who have posed before me.

Instead of posing an idiotic comments learn the facts about who/what CCP are after in this new "program". You can sill pop your drones from your Domi or Ishtar go do what ever it is you have to then come back....because once a mission is cleared then it wont respawn till after DT and you have to come back to turn it in to set up another. The same with mining you still have to come back time to time to empty your cargo (unless your using a bot which is against the EULA anyway)

I fail to see how so many people cant understand that......
Suqq Madiq
#279 - 2012-08-09 19:10:02 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Cifese wrote:

Let me rephrase that in a way that will explain why he won't tell you:

Actually, the previous rule was abundantly clear and easily applied: "any use of a bot or macro makes it botting". Now, if legitimate gameplay is botting if it exceeds certain isk thresholds, suddenly we don't have an abundantly clear and easily applied rule.


Until that "legitimate gameplay" is ruled otherwise, as is the case here, and that "legitimate gameplay" is forced out. At this point, nobody will be banned or otherwise sanctioned who isn't in clear violation of the rules.
Brokers Clone
#280 - 2012-08-09 19:10:35 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Brokers Clone wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:

Brokers Clone wrote:
...Stuff...
Wait
Watch rats spawn
See drones kill rats...
get bounty
etc...etc...etc...


Except that he stated mining then used ratting as an example, which would certainly still be detected and fall into the same category.


WOW.

Dude, I am beginning to think that this is an issue that is going to need CSM input.. I mean.... there are LOTS of cases where Rats spawn.... and lots of people sit and wait (at PC or away)

There are mining ships that mine all day long, unattended (with alts or team members lugging away can contents from time to time)

If ANY of this, NON-BOTTING, Activity is going to change, Fine
BUT YOU NEED TO SAY SO IN 70 point Font, Everywhere
And I think you might want to ring the CSM


And none of them fall within this category. Feel free to alert the CSM.



So, when I mentioned ratting, in a belt, while mining, it WAS in the same category as bannable stuffs
But when I mentioned the same thing (are LOTS of cases where Rats spawn.... and lots of people sit and wait (at PC or away)) you said it did NOT fall into the bad pool...

And I am still a wee bit confused.

But hey, I am just a clone of the Broker... what do I know