These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Titan fair to bump or not?

First post First post
Author
Koz Katral
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#121 - 2014-09-30 11:56:01 UTC
It seems to be at this point the official line from CCP is to "Say nothing and hope everyone forgets about this"

Not gonna happen - unban Aglon, clarify your rules and make your inconsistent GM team accountable for their flawed actions.
Itachi XIII
Lost Opportunity
MIDAS 22
#122 - 2014-09-30 12:31:11 UTC
Demeter Corinth wrote:
CCP,

This decision you made to permaban Aglon is based on flawed logic. What you deem as an exploit is in fact a spatial mechanic that your game allows for. Your coding/programming allows for ships to be 'bumped' which extend past the safety of a POS shield. If a pilot doesn't want to be bumped, all he/she has to do is 'not' exit the POS shield. Pretty straight forward.

Your ban hammer is misplaced and is a terrible precedent to set for the game at large.

I am not a political animal, I don't hang around the forums. This is by choice. So in the two years I have played this game, if I do not know something is an exploit, would you ban me if I did it? If all I did was bump a ship that is bumpable because your coding is flawed? Effectively that's what you have done. You have banned someone for doing something the game allows by its nature. If you don't want people bumping ships outside of a POS shield, then put code into the game that prevents it.

Instead, you made Aglon your programmers' scapegoat. Rather than have your own staff held accountable to fix the real issue, you blame the players for doing what the game allows in its current state.

You have also changed the face of POS warfare with this decision. People will be afraid to bump ships that 'are' lockable, which IS a legal mechanic per your recent statements, because maybe at the instant the bump occurs, the ship is now far enough back inside the shield that it is no longer lockable. Is that ban worthy?

What if enterprising corps put a fleet of capitals on the POS edge, half lockable, half not, but able to pop out on a moment's notice. If you bump the lockable ones, the unlockable ones get bumped too. Is that ban worthy?

Rather than have your players' creativity stymied, fix your frigging code. Then no one (not you, not the players) has to worry about it. And for goodness sake, unban Aglon. He should not be held accountable because of the game's inherent programming flaws. If you want to reimburse the Titan, sure whatevs. But the permaban is unreasonable, not warranted, and masks the real underlying issue.

-D



this.
Naughty Cargo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#123 - 2014-09-30 13:29:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Naughty Cargo
Posted to try and get their attention on twitter. Might do a blog post next time sharing my true feelings, not that it would make a difference. >.>

'And so another day passes, as the alliances and coalitions of nullsec continue to play the game without a care. We here in lowsec continue to stand up for each other and wonder if we will be banned for what used to be one of the most enjoyable and fulfilling endeavours a solo lowsec pilot could embark upon.' -Jazz

'I'm quickly running out of the patience required to keep pouring money into a game where I may be arbitrarily banned for undefined reasons.
This is impacting our alliances playstyle, and forcing us to second guess any engagements that occur in or around the edge of a POS shield, which is a sizeable part of our content.
The lowsec community is requesting a response from CCP on this thread and it's subject matter. This issue needs to be fully clarified.' -Chand

#freeaglon
a newbie
Trust Doesn't Rust
Sev3rance
#124 - 2014-09-30 13:31:08 UTC
Pretty easy here, if you cannot lock the ship its IN THE SHEILD. If you were obnoxious enough to bump it out and someone got banned, well, ban earned.

Blowing up on twitter about something because you can't get an EXACT case answer for semantics is a useless and annoying behavior because someone was punished.

If you can't lock it, you're not supposed to. Bumping is allowed for things like LOCKABLE targets, to-from stations, gates, etc. If its inside a pos, enjoy the ban.

...um.. fire?

Naughty Cargo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#125 - 2014-09-30 13:50:11 UTC
a newbie wrote:
Pretty easy here, if you cannot lock the ship its IN THE SHEILD. If you were obnoxious enough to bump it out and someone got banned, well, ban earned.

Blowing up on twitter about something because you can't get an EXACT case answer for semantics is a useless and annoying behavior because someone was punished.

If you can't lock it, you're not supposed to. Bumping is allowed for things like LOCKABLE targets, to-from stations, gates, etc. If its inside a pos, enjoy the ban.


But titan bowling is alright yeah?

Also, there is so much wrong with this comment I can't even bear it.
Itachi XIII
Lost Opportunity
MIDAS 22
#126 - 2014-09-30 14:07:14 UTC
a newbie wrote:
. Bumping is allowed for things like LOCKABLE targets, to-from stations, gates, etc. If its inside a pos, enjoy the ban.



did you know you can bump ships on gates stations that are not lockable? and the model of the titan was half way outside pos shields.
Itachi XIII
Lost Opportunity
MIDAS 22
#127 - 2014-09-30 14:15:45 UTC
double post
Eldwinn
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#128 - 2014-09-30 15:13:13 UTC
Still waiting for a response.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#129 - 2014-09-30 16:41:55 UTC
is there actually any way to kill a pos titan now?
Chandaris
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#130 - 2014-09-30 16:47:04 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
is there actually any way to kill a pos titan now?


Assuming 'lockable/not lockable' is the transitioning condition, which is the clarification we are requesting

- get the password, bump him out, or have a spy do it
- wait for him to screw up and poke out the shields enough to lock him, then bump him out
- kill the pos and hope it's not stronted
- RF/kill the pos and the storage array housing the titan
- RF/kill the pos with the titan logged out, and setup a HIC login trap for it

would be the only options I can envision.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#131 - 2014-09-30 16:51:23 UTC
Chandaris wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
is there actually any way to kill a pos titan now?


Assuming 'lockable/not lockable' is the transitioning condition, which is the clarification we are requesting

- get the password, bump him out, or have a spy do it
- wait for him to screw up and poke out the shields enough to lock him, then bump him out
- kill the pos and hope it's not stronted
- RF/kill the pos and the storage array housing the titan
- RF/kill the pos with the titan logged out, and setup a HIC login trap for it

would be the only options I can envision.


so basically no
Zion Maldor
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#132 - 2014-09-30 17:42:44 UTC
Apparently some people are allowed to bump them out. We won't really know because no one seems to want to address the question.

- Zion
Naughty Cargo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#133 - 2014-09-30 17:46:44 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Chandaris wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
is there actually any way to kill a pos titan now?


Assuming 'lockable/not lockable' is the transitioning condition, which is the clarification we are requesting

- get the password, bump him out, or have a spy do it
- wait for him to screw up and poke out the shields enough to lock him, then bump him out
- kill the pos and hope it's not stronted
- RF/kill the pos and the storage array housing the titan
- RF/kill the pos with the titan logged out, and setup a HIC login trap for it

would be the only options I can envision.


so basically no


Unless you're part of a null blob. Then all bets are off.
Anabaric
The Grumpy Bastards
#134 - 2014-09-30 18:13:15 UTC
I think you're pretty safe to bump it out as long as the pilot doesn't petition.

Downside I think it is now standard practice to petition all Titan losses, just in case some random GM got laid the previous night.

Community Manager www.Battleclinic.com @battleclinic Loadouts + Killboards + Forums Twitter @anabaric_eve www.the-bastards.net Recruitment: OPEN

Jazz Caden
Convicts and Savages
#135 - 2014-09-30 20:25:25 UTC
Now let's not go living in a fantasy world Anabaric lol.
But on a serious note, CCP is really taking too long to respond to this. So many good points and genuine concern from players with not even so much as a "hey guys were looking into it".
Sad times...

#FreeAlgon
Sgt LoveDragon
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#136 - 2014-09-30 22:43:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt LoveDragon
Jazz Caden wrote:
Now let's not go living in a fantasy world Anabaric lol.
But on a serious note, CCP is really taking too long to respond to this. So many good points and genuine concern from players with not even so much as a "hey guys were looking into it".
Sad times...

#FreeAlgon



Perhaps it is because of the new cloaking effect from Oceanus preventing CCP from seeing it.

Seriously though i am hoping it may have something to do with a new release and they are busier than usual.
Tirelion
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#137 - 2014-10-01 01:38:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Tirelion
a newbie wrote:
Pretty easy here, if you cannot lock the ship its IN THE SHEILD. If you were obnoxious enough to bump it out and someone got banned, well, ban earned.

Blowing up on twitter about something because you can't get an EXACT case answer for semantics is a useless and annoying behavior because someone was punished.

If you can't lock it, you're not supposed to. Bumping is allowed for things like LOCKABLE targets, to-from stations, gates, etc. If its inside a pos, enjoy the ban.



Would you like to go ahead and show me where in the policy that an unlockable ship is considered to be "in" the shields, or how in any way that was clarified? Want to field this one for me? Because right now you sound like an uneducated imbecile. There a many situations where a ship may be "unlockable", perhaps a jammer on the tower has you jammed, how would you know? Don't go pontificating on a topic you obviously know nothing about just to make your pedantic little self sound smarter than you actually are.

#freeaglon
Mr Spaxi
#138 - 2014-10-01 10:07:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Spaxi
It's nice to see there's cohesion and serenity between CCP members and a very developed communication bridge between players and the GMs. I'm glad that the money I'm paying monthly is going for a good cause.

/sarcasm_off

Anabaric wrote:

Downside I think it is now standard practice to petition all Titan losses, just in case some random GM got laid the previous night.


This.
Jeven HouseBenyo
Vanity Thy Name Is
#139 - 2014-10-01 11:40:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jeven HouseBenyo
Okay, now I have to ask a few questions at this point.

Where is the gigantic list of exploits that are not acceptable, in one location? I'll take the time to read them as soon as I can find this list. Link please. Also the "polite agreements outside official rules" list and location.

What does count as inside/outside bubble due to bad parking job and therefore bumpable in situations like these? Some clarification please.

I don't know any of the pilots involved on either side, but I find it vaguely disturbing the lack of across the board GM communication and enforcement on specific decisions, how what's acceptable in one Region is a complete No-Go in another, etc.

Is there a "House Rules" book from one place to another I need to get ahold of so I don't get in trouble while learning Eve and not wanting to bail as a Rookie? What are the variations of rules and their enforcement from highsec, lowsec, and nullsec? Are there differences? If so, please clearly explain as I don't understand that. Part of that whole sauce for the goose upbringing I had beat into my skull growing up.

If I don't know the sandbox arbitrary rules here and there, I'm going to run into something that'll get me banned and I won't know it until it's too late.

The perma-ban, in my opinion, at this point either needs to be lifted or some reasons for it remaining passed to the player base. The "it's an internal affair" simply isn't going to fly on this one, considering no clarification on the bumping in this Titan's situation has been released as WHY this is exploit when it does appear it's occurred elsewhere and there was NOT a perma-ban handed out for those instances.

Even the bestest peeps have Kender moments. This is sounding like one, and the continuing silence reeks of, if we ignore it long enough, it'll go away.

Thank you for your time this morning.

>Jeven

Minny boat flyer, unofficial squeaky wheel.

'Game Ethics and Morality Monitor' I remember promises.

Snark at 11-24/7/365.25. Overshare? Yup.

Yes it's my fault. And if you don't staap it I'll do it again. ;-P

No you can't has my stuffs OR my SPs.

Gfy Trextron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#140 - 2014-10-01 14:17:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Gfy Trextron
Aglon has received a reply and was reduced to a 30 day ban. (Still Horse ****)


"POS bumping does fall under POS bowling umbrella"

I would be detailed here but he asked not to be for fear of futher banning.

They further state stuff about not being clear on circumstances, so giving him the benefit of the doubt, yada yada.

So, is this the latest rule? NO ship bumping unless lockable first? Still no clear post or word from CCP to the community.

I will write off the lack of banning of the 0.0 guys as typical CCP favoritism.

Gfy
(Goofy)

P.S. Thanks for all of the support and effort put into this by so many people.