These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Looking for a CCP response: Causing lag by Blue-ing (abandoning) wrecks in Incursions

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2012-02-21 20:54:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss Kerr
Looking for a CCP response:

Is blue-ing wrecks in any way an exploit in Incursion sits, specifically in HQs.
Are there any repercussions to blue-ing wrecks in HQ sites? (ie temp bans etc)
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#2 - 2012-02-21 20:57:51 UTC
You mean abandoning them? Why would this be an exploit/bannable?
Xonus Calimar
CaeIum Incognitum
#3 - 2012-02-21 20:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Xonus Calimar
*Edit: Yeah, what Corina said.
adopt
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2012-02-21 21:01:51 UTC
He means in HQs, some people abandon them to lag-out logistics ships so that people die, this is particularly dangerous in TCRCs and NRFs where everything is in one room. To be honest it should, as it is using something outside of player control to make them lose their ships. And I tell you this from my experience from doing them not some random pubbie who thinks they know everything.
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2012-02-21 21:02:33 UTC
Correct, I mean abandoning them...in HQ sites when there are a lot of wrecks abandoning them causes lag in the site.
There is a lot of speculation in fleets that this is a ban-able offense.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#6 - 2012-02-21 21:04:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
Ah, understood.
No more confusion.

And it should be... no idea if it is.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#7 - 2012-02-21 21:06:35 UTC
It should be, bending the game to purposly to 'malfunction' to gain an advantage has usually always ruled an punishable offense in the past.

Spiking a lag event on purpose for the sole purpose to gain an advantage is not normal game play.

I suspect there is no offical stance on it yet and there will be soon enough.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Xonus Calimar
CaeIum Incognitum
#8 - 2012-02-21 21:07:40 UTC
adopt wrote:
some people abandon them to lag-out logistics ships so that people die


Hmm, interesting...

I know they don't like it when people drop tons of cans around gates to lag people out. Haven't heard about this issue before though.
Lexmana
#9 - 2012-02-21 21:09:05 UTC
Soon there will only be rocks left in the sandbox.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#10 - 2012-02-21 21:36:25 UTC  |  Edited by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
This is one I haven't heard of. The problem is you have to prove their intent was to create lag. All they'd have to do is put a salvage alt on the gate and claim they were getting ready to salvage the field when it was done, and plead ignorance about the lack of salvage.

As there is zero value in incursion wrecks and their presence can be exploited to create lag, the obvious solution is to either remove the wrecks entirely, or have them automatically abandon so that it happens one at a time.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2012-02-21 21:40:33 UTC
Incursion wrecks have a decent amount of armor plates and a few other things. Salvaging enough of them is easy isk
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#12 - 2012-02-21 22:30:34 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
And it should be... no idea if it is.


This. CCP judgment needed.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Endeavour Starfleet
#13 - 2012-02-21 22:32:55 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
Soon there will only be rocks left in the sandbox.


There is a HUGE difference between sandbox mechanics and tactics that exploit out of game situations to gain an advantage or to do harm.

I heard in quite a few fleets how people bluing wrecks were banned. While this needs a more permanent solution I would strongly suggest NOT doing it as it IS an exploit.
Jack Tronic
borkedLabs
#14 - 2012-02-21 22:37:28 UTC
Why would blueing wrecks for your salvaging alt be exploitable?
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2012-02-21 22:40:16 UTC
Jack Tronic wrote:
Why would blueing wrecks for your salvaging alt be exploitable?


See post #4 and #5
Darrow Hill
Vodka and Vice
#16 - 2012-02-21 22:42:31 UTC
Banning people on a case by case basis is a very inelegant solution.

What if the option to abandon wrecks was removed while in a fleet? Or the option given only to the FC?
Miss Kerr
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2012-02-21 22:47:22 UTC
Darrow Hill wrote:
Banning people on a case by case basis is a very inelegant solution.

What if the option to abandon wrecks was removed while in a fleet? Or the option given only to the FC?


Although Im not looking for a solution to the issue, just to get the "ALL MIGHTY" word.....You have an interesting idea, also adding the act of abandoning to the fleet history would be nice.
Endeavour Starfleet
#18 - 2012-02-21 22:49:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
Jack Tronic wrote:
Why would blueing wrecks for your salvaging alt be exploitable?


Very rarely is that actually the case.

A good chunk of the time it is just an accident. Usually happens between gates in some sites. Few are going to petition that as it usually is just the annoyance of logging back in and reinvite to fleet if needed.

However during combat there is virtually no excuse for. Bluing during combat is most often done with harm in mind. And has gotten people banned.

Darrow Hill wrote:
Banning people on a case by case basis is a very inelegant solution.

What if the option to abandon wrecks was removed while in a fleet? Or the option given only to the FC?



Supporting this as well as what the next person said about blue in history.
Anya Ohaya
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#19 - 2012-02-21 22:50:08 UTC
Thread might get more attention from a GM if the title and OP mentioned deliberately causing lag. CCP isn't going to care about the ownership of wrecks.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#20 - 2012-02-21 22:50:40 UTC
Interesting. I would think that if there was an event that caused that large a spike then TiDi would kick in, allowing plenty of time to do whatever.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
123Next pageLast page