These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Ship Replacement Policy Change

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gavascon
need more power inc.
#21 - 2015-08-31 04:02:11 UTC


We can't take it back because it did happen. A person actually experienced destroying the other ship. CCP is responsible and DO make amends for that. They CAN'T erase what happened, so they reimburse the loss to the best of their abilities without making the system exploitable.[/quote]

years ago, maybe a situation like this could be exploitable.
today, pretty hard to do.

players can no longer log off to escape death. in fact, they have a log off timer to prevent that.

the idea is to file for LEGITIMATE reasons.
and, again, everything has to verified on CCP's servers. if it can't be verified, reimbursement is not granted.

i totally agree with you about outcome, though.
who's to say what the actual outcome would have been had Pilot B not disconnected?
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#22 - 2015-08-31 04:02:41 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Or just remove ship replacement under any circumstances. The simple solution is always the best solution.

Type NOFEAR if you agree.

Mr Epeen Cool


+42

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#23 - 2015-08-31 04:09:36 UTC
op, #nopoorspls o7

Just Add Water
Davis TetrisKing
The Vendunari
End of Life
#24 - 2015-08-31 04:29:12 UTC
Nat Silverguard wrote:
op, #nopoorspls o7


I hear war deccing newbies in HS for 1337 PVP is expensive.
Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#25 - 2015-08-31 05:31:55 UTC
I guess we didn't have a tear thread about reimbursement that actually happened yet....

+1 for being creative and finding something original to whine about.

Now go away
Raiz Nhell
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2015-08-31 05:46:38 UTC
How far do you reimburse?

'A' shoots 'B'
'B' explodes
'A' loots 'B'
'A' uses ammo and guns from 'B' to destroy 'C'
Should 'C' be reimbursed for his loss due to 'B''s weapons on 'A'?

OR

'A' shoots 'B'
'B' explodes
'C' warps in and de-cloaks on 'B's wreak
'C' explodes
Does 'C' get reimbursed?

OR

'A' shoots 'B'
'B' explodes
'A' loots 'B'
'A' gives 'C' 'B''s corpse for 'reasons'
'C' has a wild, intoxicating and confusing night with 'B''s corpse somehow resulting in 'D'
Does 'D' never exist?

And so on and so on...

I would hate to work out the interactions and permutations based on your idea even for a ticket turn-around of an hour, let alone the average time for ship reimbursement... that would be an absolute nightmare and lead to a completely unworkable solution...

Think of 'D', for the sake of us all...

There is no such thing as a fair fight...

If your fighting fair you have automatically put yourself at a disadvantage.
Harrison Tato
Yamato Holdings
#27 - 2015-08-31 06:21:07 UTC
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#28 - 2015-08-31 06:32:01 UTC
OP I have the solution:

When a ship explodes, Tranquility gets paused and CCP check if there was a problem with the server prior or during ship combat.
A report of CCPs findings is sent to all involved parties.
All involved parties sign an agreement, that they accept CCPs report and will not file a petition later on.
TQ is unpaused, once all signed agreements have been verified by CCP.

Glad I could help.

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.
innocentbystanderbsc
Solace Federation
#29 - 2015-08-31 09:55:16 UTC
SIGNED
Zeus Cronus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2015-08-31 10:07:59 UTC
SIGNED.

Let's be clear here: There's no "exploiting" the system. Why? Because definitionally, this only happens when it is CCPs fault. If you discover a bug in their code and consistently exploit, you get banned. One day, I was mining in null in a retriever. A gang warped in on me. I tried to warp to station.... except.... "natural phenomenon" are disrupting your warp. I was not scrammed y the players, but a glitch in CCPs code made me unable to warp. I filed a ticket, and they said "yep, definitely, our bad, just make sure you have enough isk in your wallet so it doesn't go negative when we remove the insurance". When I lost my ship, pretty much everything but 1 rig I had dropped. So I lost a 28mill platinum insurance payout for a 22 mill retriever. **** THAT. It's your own ******* fault ccp when this happens, definitionally, so I am entitled to all of it back. All you bitter vets saying you think CCP should never replace ships: What if the gold magnate was lost because of a glitch, but CCP was like "nope, we ain't replacing that". CCP needs to take responsibility for its mistakes.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#31 - 2015-08-31 10:22:28 UTC
Zeus Cronus wrote:
Let's be clear here: There's no "exploiting" the system.
Of course there is.
All systems dealing with roll-backs to a previous state are, and you are ridiculously cute in your naïveté if you think for a second that the GMs haven't made spurious decisions in situations like these time and time again.

Quote:
I am entitled
You sure are. This is a bad character trait and you should work on getting rid of it.

You made the cardinal mistake of flying something you couldn't afford to lose, and managed to find yourself in a losing position where you, unsurprisingly, lost your ship. CCP was kind enough to give you back more than you were due, and yet here you are, yelling at them rather than take responsibility for your massive mistake. What they did is already above and beyond the one thing you're entitled to: the ability to log in if you've paid your subscription.
Zeus Cronus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2015-08-31 10:29:34 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Zeus Cronus wrote:
Let's be clear here: There's no "exploiting" the system.
Of course there is.
All systems dealing with roll-backs to a previous state are, and you are ridiculously cute in your naïveté if you think for a second that the GMs haven't made spurious decisions in situations like these time and time again.

Quote:
I am entitled
You sure are. This is a bad character trait and you should work on getting rid of it.

You made the cardinal mistake of flying something you couldn't afford to lose, and managed to find yourself in a losing position where you, unsurprisingly, lost your ship. CCP was kind enough to give you back more than you were due, and yet here you are, yelling at them rather than take responsibility for your massive mistake. What they did is already above and beyond the one thing you're entitled to: the ability to log in if you've paid your subscription.

I could afford to lose it. I had no financial problems, and had already bought myself a new mining barge before CCP gave me back my retriever. I made no mistake. If CCP hadn't screwed up, I'd have been safely docked up, but CCPs mistake, not mine, prevented me from docking up. And, for the record, there was an alliance member in a recon ship sitting in the belt watching the whole time. So.... maybe don't make assumptions about me.... nowhere did I say I was poor :P
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#33 - 2015-08-31 10:41:23 UTC
Zeus Cronus wrote:
I could afford to lose it.
Then there's no reason for you to complain, now is there?

Quote:
I made no mistake. If CCP hadn't screwed up, I'd have been safely docked up
You were still in the belt when the gang showed up. The only assumption here is that you would have been safely docked up — there's that counterfactual reasoning again, which is exactly why the OP's idea is nonsense.

Quote:
nowhere did I say I was poor :P
…aside from the warning about your wallet going negative over such a minute adjustment.
Zeus Cronus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2015-08-31 10:44:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Zeus Cronus wrote:
I could afford to lose it.
Then there's no reason for you to complain, now is there?

Quote:
I made no mistake. If CCP hadn't screwed up, I'd have been safely docked up
You were still in the belt when the gang showed up. The only assumption here is that you would have been safely docked up — there's that counterfactual reasoning again, which is exactly why the OP's idea is nonsense.

Quote:
nowhere did I say I was poor :P
…aside from the warning about your wallet going negative over such a minute adjustment.

I said my wallet might go negative. Not that I was poor. I keep most of my liquid isk on one never used char so I don't accidentally get rid of it all, and need to distribute it. I was in that belt with them for over 30 seconds b4 they blew me up. If they don't point you in 30 seconds, they don't have ******* points.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#35 - 2015-08-31 10:53:33 UTC
Zeus Cronus wrote:
I said my wallet might go negative.
That rather means you're poor, you know…

Quote:
I was in that belt with them for over 30 seconds b4 they blew me up.
So roughly the standard time for a gank, then — the time that gets lots of people killed. And you obviously were paying attention to their ewar usage, which would definitely not be covered up by the message that you're warp disrupted. Yup, yup, yup.

You can dress it up in wishful thinking any way you like — it's still counterfactual.
Zeus Cronus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2015-08-31 10:59:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Zeus Cronus wrote:
I said my wallet might go negative.
That rather means you're poor, you know…

Quote:
I was in that belt with them for over 30 seconds b4 they blew me up.
So roughly the standard time for a gank, then — the time that gets lots of people killed. And you obviously were paying attention to their ewar usage, which would definitely not be covered up by the message that you're warp disrupted. Yup, yup, yup.

You can dress it up in wishful thinking any way you like — it's still counterfactual.

Oh? I could have warped out. Except CCP messed up. Go ahead, I'll look through my old tickets, figure out which GM it was, and you can argue with them. Also; don't misquote me. I justified very well why my wallet might go negative even if I wasn't poor. Don't pretend otherwise. Also, next time *insert site you use here* gets hacked, you have no claim. Sure, they made a mistake. But it's not like they should acknowledge it, or try to fix it, by your reasoning.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#37 - 2015-08-31 11:04:21 UTC
Zeus Cronus wrote:
Oh? I could have warped out.
…you assume. There's nothing to actually prove that, and in fact, you couldn't. Hence: counterfactual.

Quote:
Also; don't misquote me.
I didn't. I simply quoted the thing you keep repeating that suggests that you're poor.

Quote:
But it's not like they should acknowledge it, or try to fix it, by your reasoning.
That's entirely your reasoning.
Zeus Cronus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2015-08-31 11:09:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Zeus Cronus
Tippia wrote:
Zeus Cronus wrote:
Oh? I could have warped out.
…you assume. There's nothing to actually prove that, and in fact, you couldn't. Hence: counterfactual.

Quote:
Also; don't misquote me.
I didn't. I simply quoted the thing you keep repeating that suggests that you're poor.

Quote:
But it's not like they should acknowledge it, or try to fix it, by your reasoning.
That's entirely your reasoning.

1st thing: You are essentially saying that the GM who decided to compensate me was wrong. I will go look up which GM it was, and you can argue with them. Otherwise, you are just spouting Bullsh*t.

2nd thing: I explained why that wasn't an indication I was poor, and yet you continued to cite it as evidence of my poverty.

3rd thing: Um... what? DO you read yourself? Or, as I am getting the sense, are you just arguing to be a flame and a troll?
EDIT: Looks like the support ticket is now to old to show up, or whatever the **** happened after CCP changed the help system. Regardless, you are basically saying you know better reading what I have typed then a GM who had access to the server logs and could see what those other ships/players did. So I'd say you're still spouting Bullsh*t
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#39 - 2015-08-31 11:18:01 UTC
Zeus Cronus wrote:
1st thing: You are essentially saying that the GM who decided to compensate me was wrong.
No. I'm simply saying that you have no way of knowing what would have happened had the the server not kept you locked down.

The fact that GMs have a longstanding tradition of being wrong isn't helping your case, granted, but that's a completely separate matter from what I'm saying.

Quote:
I explained why that wasn't an indication I was poor
No, you explained why, in spite of the clear indication, you choose to not label yourself as poor. The indication does not change, not even though constant repetition.

Quote:
3rd thing: Um... what? DO you read yourself?
Yes. And nowhere in what I've said has any such reasoning been presented. It is entirely yours because you're the one who came up with it.
Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#40 - 2015-08-31 11:21:06 UTC
Nonsense.