Crime & Punishment

Hello fellow capsuleers!

Let me be honest, this is a whine session so if anyone responds below with WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMBULANCE you can **** yourself as I already said it was a whaambulance. Recently, in a fight we lost 4billion isk of ships (on a contract) because our logi disconnected at the worst possible moment. While we deal with this, we can replace our ships so whatever... what should be done about this? Is CCP at ALL responsible for the loss of an internet connection or is it normal? Imagine it being nullsec and 50-100b in losses, is that okay too? Do we ever draw a line? Where does the line go?

Admittedly this is me angry because of the disconnect but what can we do about it? I'm not as old as the old guard but certainly someone who has heard from CCP can say something. I'm just curious. It's bullshit but it's fact. How do you prevent disconnect losses without allowing cheating. See you, out there!

Avoiding the troll is going to be difficult with this one. However, I will try. Knowing the capabilities of your pilots is very mission critical. This has to be extended to include not just the skill points and pixels chosen but the player and their physical hardware as well. If a person has a client that has proven to break down when more than a dozen objects load on grid then it is on the FC and pilot both to fix it.

This is even more true as the importance of the role goes Logi pilots need to have their hardware as a critical part of the setup and plan accordingly in their overview and graphics. If they insist on seeing their pixels wiz about and it costs them performance then it is up to the FC to remind them that eve is called spread sheets online for a good reason.

Finally, eventually **** happens. If your working with 4b of assets and have only one logi then you should reexamine risk v reward. And given the efficiency and ease of use the T1 cruiser logi gets then there is no excuse to have one DC be the pivotal factor.

And do post the loss mail(s) I am sure we all want to see what was onboard.

I don't follow your logic. It seems ludicrous to suggest that CCP is in anyway capable (to say nothing of responsible) for keeping any external connection to their network stable. As such, the idea of returning pixels based on a loss of that connection is laughable at best.

Nor am I familiar with the COVEN event you are making reference to. So I can not speak to that fairness or not.

That being said, the only places (I know of) where CCP might consider addressing losses due to lag or latency would be cases where something was done deliberately to attack the server conditions. Like abandoning hundreds of drones around a gate to catch cloaky frigs or spamming convo requests to opposing logi pilots. Both of which have been sited in their turn as exploits and steps taken to suppress the practices. To my knowledge the usual response to losses were a cordial denial of culpability and then a later nerf and or ban hammer spree.

That is about what I expect but not what I'm asking. Though, I appreciate your time :)

you mean you fly shinies and do not have a backup Fibre op connection ready to auto hotswap within 1ms of losing first fibre connection?

LOL get with the '90's

If it's server error they will re-imburse. Petition a loss and see what their conclusion is.That is the be all and end all. If their hardware is functioning correctly they will not re-imburse because they are fulfilling their side of the contract. Which is to allow you an external entity to log into their server.

No, CCP is not responsible, and cannot be held responsible.

You cannot prevent connection losses. It happens sometimes. on CCPs side when you lose the connection it would look no different than if you disconnected your Ethernet cable.

There is no way for CCP to determine what a "legitimate" disconnect is.

I recommend you post with an alt next time. You never know who is watching your ignorant posts.

Where was the ignorance?

I'm not the one wanting to blame uncontrollable internet connections on the server I'm connecting to.

And the Al Gore thing was me being facetious, but I'd have thought that was obvious.

Nothing, obviously, because it's not a problem.